E P I C A l e r t
"Defend Privacy. Support EPIC." http://epic.org/donate
The House of Representatives recently adopted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 which included strong privacy provisions for the proposed medical health network under Subtitle - D. The last amended Senate version of the bill also included similar provision. The House Stimulus Bill amends the Public Health Service Act and the Social Security Act by adding key definitions. Definitions of "breach," "personal health records" and "protected health information" were clarified. Title 30 of the bill sets up the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology with the Department of Health and Human Services. The National Coordinator is to update the existing Federal Health IT Strategic Plan to include specific objectives and milestones.
These objectives include the incorporation of privacy and security protections for the electronic exchange of individual's identifiable health information; implementation of security methods to ensure appropriate authorization and electronic authentication of health information; specifying technologies for rendering health information unusable, unreadable, or indecipherable; and strategies to enhance the use of health information technology in improving the quality of health care.
The privacy protections also include timeliness and methods of breach notifications; application of privacy provisions and penalties to business associates of covered entities; and the restriction on the sale of medical data. Periodic audits also ensure that covered entities and business associates adhere to privacy requirements.
The bill mandates the National Coordinator to submit reports to the legislature on various issues including additional funding or authority, implementation and impact assessment. The bill also directs the appointment of a Chief Privacy Officer of the Office of the National Coordinator to advise on privacy, security, and data stewardship of electronic health information and coordinate with other agencies and their personnel.
The Health Information Technology Policy Committee is also established by the bill to make policy recommendations to the National Coordinator relating to the implementation of a nationwide health information technology infrastructure permitting use and exchange of health information. The Committee is charged with recommending where the standards, specification and certifications are needed in the realm of electronic exchange of health information. The areas where the Committee are required to consider include (1) technologies that protect the medical privacy and promote security in electronic health records; (2) a nationwide health information technology infrastructure that allows accurate electronic exchange of medical information; (3) the utilization of certified electronic health record; (4) technologies that renders medical information unusable, unreadable or indecipherable to unauthorized individuals during network or physical transmission.
The HIT Standards Committee, set up by the statute, is assigned the task of recommending to the National Coordinator standards, implementation specifications and certification criteria. The duties of the Standards Committee includes standards development, acting as a forum, and provisions for public inputs. The HIT Standards Committee recommendations will also have to be published. The bill also goes on to apply the process of adoption of endorsed standards and specifically exempts private entities.
Sections of the bill also mandate that agencies promoting quality and efficient health care in Federal government or sponsored health care programs to agree that all health care providers and similar entities utilizes health information technology systems and meet the standards and specifications adopted under the bill.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 imposes the condition that the funds can be appropriated only if the investments or funds are for products permitting complete and accurate electronic exchange and use of medical information including standards for security, privacy, and quality improvement functions that have been adopted by the Office of the National Coordinator. These provisions have also been approved in the Senate. Patient Privacy Rights supported the legislation.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:h.r.00001:
Subtitle D - Privacy: http://epic.org/privacy/pdf/subtitleDPrivacy.pdf
Encryption requirements under the statute: http://epic.org/privacy/pdf/MarkeyAmendment.pdf
Patient Privacy Rights: http://www.patientprivacyrights.org/
Senator Leahy's statement on medical privacy: http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200901/012709a.html
EPIC's page on Medical Privacy: http://epic.org/privacy/medical/default.html
On the occasion of the International Privacy Day on January 28, 2009, the Public Voice urged support for the Council of Europe Privacy Convention No. 108. The object of the Privacy Convention was to strengthen the legal protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal information relating to them. At the time of its creation, there was an emerging need for such legal rules in view of the increasing use of computers for administrative purposes. With the advent of the internet, the transfer of personal data across nationals borders became prevalent and the need for the protection of personal information even more necessary.
The Member States of the Council of Europe signed the "Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data" in Strasbourg, France on January 28, 1981 with the objective of securing in the territory of each nation for every individual, whatever his nationality or residence, respect for his rights and fundamental freedoms, and in particular his right to privacy, with regard to automatic processing of personal data relating to him.
The Public Voice stated that there is very little what consumers can do today to protect their personal information. If meaningful solutions are to be developed, the focus must necessarily be on those entities that are in control of the data concerning the private lives of persons - the industry and the governments. The key objective is to motivate people to action - not just checking their privacy settings, shredding old bank statements or installing a browser extension, but to raise awareness of why meaningful regulation of privacy and enforcement of privacy rights are key for the protection of the ability to control personal information.
At present, forty-one countries have ratified the Council of Europe Privacy Convention. A coalition organized by the Public Voice is requesting that national governments support the Council of Europe Privacy Convention and adopt comprehensive privacy legislation based on that standard.
In the United States, the US Privacy Coalition launched the campaign to urge the US Government to support the Council of Europe Privacy Convention and has proposed a resolution for the U.S. Senate. If adopted, it would provide a broad framework upon which privacy laws providing better safeguards could be enacted. According to Net Dialogue, the "Convention has withstood the test of time by being adaptive and fairly rigorous. Today the principles of this agreement are being examined for their applicability to the collection and processing of biometric data."
The Public Voice: http://www.thepublicvoice.org/
International Privacy Day - Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/event.php?eid=54024777428
Privacy Coalition's Resolution on International Privacy Day: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_PrivCoal_Intl_Priv_Day.html
Summary of the Privacy Convention: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Summaries/Html/108.htm
Background of the Privacy Convention (ETS No. 108): http://epic.org/redirect/020909_PrivConv_bckgrnd.html
Text of the Privacy Convention (ETS No. 108): http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/108.htm
Explanatory Report on the Privacy Convention: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Reports/Html/108.htm
Ratifications of the Privacy Convention: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_CoE_ETS108.html
European Convention on Cybercrime: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_CoE_ETS185.html
EPIC's letter to Senate dissuading support for Cybercrime Convention: http://epic.org/privacy/intl/senateletter-072605.pdf
The National Academies called for a new approach to medical record privacy. "Beyond the HIPAA Privacy Rule: Enhancing Privacy, Improving Health Through Research" found that the current medical privacy regulations do not protect privacy and unnecessarily impede health research. The expert committee recommended Congress authorize the development of an entirely new approach to protecting personal health information in research applying privacy, data security, and accountability standards uniformly to information used in all medical research regardless the funder or who conducts the research.
The report by the Institute of Medicine, urged all institutions conducting medical research to improve data protection as data breaches were a growing threat for health information databases. The experts suggested that all portable media containing health information, including laptops, be encrypted.
The experts recommendations took into consideration benefits that both ethically conducted research as well as privacy protections ensured and came to the conclusion that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act was difficult to reconcile with other federal regulations governing research involving personally identifiable information.
Among the recommendations, the committee suggested the development of a new method that focuses on the best practices in privacy, security and transparency. The committee also suggested the usage of de-identified medical data in which personal information is removed and unauthorized re-identification is prohibited by law. Other recommendations included an ethical oversight in which use of personally identifiable information without individual consent is necessary.
Finally, the expert committee concluded that to ensure progress in the nation's health and health care, effective privacy protections must be implemented in a way that does not hinder health research or inhibit medical advances. EPIC Director Marc Rotenberg participated in the study project.
HIPAA Privacy Rule Fails to Adequately Protect Patient Privacy and Hampers Health Research: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_HIPAA_Natl_Acad.html
Report Brief: Beyond the HIPAA Privacy Rule: Enhancing Privacy, Improving Health Through Research: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_HIPAA_Rept_Brf.html
Report: Beyond the HIPAA Privacy Rule: Enhancing Privacy, Improving Health Through Research: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12458
Institute of Medicine: http://www.iom.edu/
Report Brief from the Institute of Medicine: http://www.iom.edu/File.aspx?ID=61836
President Obama in his first 24 hours in Office, issued a series of Executive Orders. One of the Orders dealt with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) activity of federal government agencies. Quoting Justice Louis Brandeis, President Obama declared "sunlight is the best disinfectant." President Obama further stated "in our democracy, the Freedom of Information Act, which encourages accountability through transparency, is the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open Government. At the heart of that commitment is the idea that accountability is in the interest of the Government and the citizenry alike."
President Obama declared the Freedom of Information should be administered with a clear presumption of openness. In response to Freedom of Information requests, executive branch agencies should act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are servants of the public. Recognizing that transparency promotes accountability and information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset, President Obama also declared that all agencies should bring in a culture of open Government. The Executive Order further directed the agencies to take affirmative steps to make information public especially using modern technology and not wait for specific requests.
The President Executive orders also included active collaboration that engages citizens in the work of their Government, innovation and public feedback as the bedrock of the new administration. Using knowledge in a dispersed society, the orders also called for increased opportunities for citizens to participate in policymaking and to provide the Government with the benefits of the citizen's collective expertise and information.
Among other initiatives, the President ordered the Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison to be closed within a year and suspension of legal proceedings against the detainees being held there. In an open letter by members of Global Openness Community welcoming President Obama's initiative on transparency, the organizations welcomed the reversal of recent trends and promote high standards of openness in government. The groups also called on governments around the world to take similar action to promote transparency and respect for the right of access to information. EPIC was one of the groups supporting the initiative.
The White House Briefing Room: Freedom of Information Act: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/FreedomofInformationAct
The White House Briefing Room: Transparency and Open Government: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_WhiteHouse_Trans_OpenGov.html
Open Letter by Members of Global Openness Community Welcoming President Obama's Initiative on Transparency: http://www.access-info.org/?id=41
EPIC's page on Freedom of Information Act: http://epic.org/open_gov/
Privacy International has identified a major security flaw in Google's new phone locational tracking service, Google Latitude. It is a new service that allows smart phones to display user locations on another smart phone or online through Google iGadget. Once installed, the application conveys location information through Google Maps. Google states that Google Latitude is completely "opt-in" and only reports the last updated location and does not keep a history of previously reported locations.
However, a number of design flaws has been identified. According to Privacy International, the Google system lacks adequate safeguards to protect users from covert opt-in to Latitude's tracking technology. Anyone with physical access to someone's phone could authorize Google Latitude without the person's knowledge. Further, someone may be given a Latitude enabled phone without being informed of Google Latitude's activation. There is no easy method of discovering the tracking status of the phone.
Cell phone tracking technology works through the use of identifying the cell phone towers in the vicinity of the cell phone user. Cell phones automatically connect to the closest tower based on the strength of the signal. Each cell location bears a corresponding identification number, which Google uses to match against a database and approximate the location of the cell phone. Urban areas have a greater density of cell phone towers. Therefore, the accuracy of identification of location increases in cities.
Privacy International also believes that Google has created an unnecessary danger to the privacy and security of users. It is clear the company is aware of the need to create a message alert on Latitude-enabled phones but has chosen to launch the service without universal access to this safeguard.
Google Latitude - Introduction: http://www.google.com/latitude/intro.html
Location Source and Accuracy: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_Google_Lat_SrcAcc.html
City Level Location Sharing: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_Google_Lat_CityShare.html
Privacy international identifies major security flaw in Google's global phone tracking system: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_PI_Google_Lat.html
EPIC's page on Personal Surveillance: http://epic.org/privacy/dv/personal_surveillance.html
Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Internet Censorship Appeal
The Supreme Court denied the last appeal of the Government from an Appeals Court decision that turned down the enforcement of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA). COPA establishes criminal penalties for any online commercial distribution of material harmful to minors. The Appeals Court held COPA unconstitutional on the ground that COPA made every web communication provider abide by the most restrictive community's standards." EPIC had challenged the implementation of COPA over ten years ago and had been fighting the case along with the ACLU and the EFF. EPIC argued that COPA violated the First Amendment as well as privacy of the individual on the internet.
Supreme Court Docket: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-565.htm
Brief for the Government: http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2000/2pet/7pet/2000-1293.pet.aa.pdf
EPIC's brief in Opposition: http://www.epic.org/free_speech/copa/op_cert.pdf
EPIC's page on ACLU v. Mukasey: http://epic.org/free_speech/copa/default.html
EPIC's page on Child Online Protection Act: http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2000/2pet/7pet/2000-1293.pet.aa.pdf
DHS Advisory Committee Issues Recommendations
The DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee made several recommendations to the new secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano and the Acting Chief Privacy Officer John W. Kropf. The letter recommended that the operations and structure of the DHS Privacy Office and addressed privacy issues currently facing the Department such as E-Verify, Border Search and Seizure of Digital Information, Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative and REAL ID. The DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee will meet in Arlington, Virginia on February 23, 2009. For prior distribution of any written materials to Committee member or to make oral presentations, the Executive Director of DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee is to be sent a copy by February 23, 2009.
The DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee Letter: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_DHS_DPIAC_letter.html
Privacy Office - DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee: http://www.dhs.gov/xinfoshare/committees/editorial_0512.shtm
Notice of meeting: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-2318.pdf
Cambridge City Council Blocks Surveillance Camera Activation
The Cambridge City Council in a Policy Order Resolution, No. O-18, on February 2, 2009 ordered that the installation of security cameras in the City of Cambridge be halted. The cameras were to be installed throughout the city under funding from the Department of Homeland Security for the stated purpose of monitoring evacuation routes. Citing potential threats to invasion of privacy and individual civil liberties outweighing any potential benefits in improving public safety, the City Council went on record opposing the installation of the security cameras and ordered the City Manager to comply.
Policy Order Resolution, No. O-18, Cambridge City Council: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_Cambridge_CC_O18.html
EPIC's page on Video Surveillance: http://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/
Surveillance Cameras Pose Privacy Threats
The Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia declared that surveillance cameras set up before the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver must not be used to monitor city residents after the game is over. Highlighting the situation in Athens, Greece after the 2004 Olympics, the Commissioner stated how the police used the cameras into a network for surveillance and thus left a troubling legacy. Holding that safety and security was of the utmost importance, the Commissioners stated that security at the Winter Olympics should not take people down the path of a surveillance society although they may be having "benevolent intentions."
Privacy, Security and the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games: http://www.privcom.gc.ca/speech/2009/sp-d_090202_e.asp
Privacy protection must be part of Vancouver Olympic Games planning, say federal and B.C. Privacy Commissioners: http://www.privcom.gc.ca/media/nr-c/2009/nr-c_090202_e.asp
EPIC's page on Video Surveillance: http://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/
House of Lords Committee Finds Growing Use of CCTV Threat to Freedom
The Select Committee on the Constitution of the British House of Lords issued the Second Report of the Session 2008-09. The report, "Surveillance: Citizens and the State," described the wide variety of surveillance in existence including closed-circuit television, the interception of telecommunications ("wiretapping"), covert activities by human agents, heat-seeking and other sensing devices, body scans, and technology for tracking movement. The report stated that Britain had the highest use of CCTV in the world with around four million cameras. Lord Harry Woolf, a former Lord Chief Justice, and two former attorney generals warned of pervasive and routine electronic surveillance.
Surveillance: Citizens and the State, Select Committee on the Constitution, House of Lords: http://epic.org/redirect/020909_Surveillance_HL_report.html
Government Postpones E-Verify Contractor Rule
The federal government has postponed an earlier DHS order directing federal employers to use the employment eligibility electronic verification program, E-Verify. The E-Verify program is a controversial employment eligibility verification system, operated by the Department of Homeland Security. EPIC, the Government Accountability Office, the Social Security Administration's Inspector General, and the CATO Institute have detailed many shortcomings of E-Verify.
Federal Register, January 14, 2009: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-651.pdf
EPIC's page on E-Verify: http://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/0707/default.html
Privacy Problems Plague New White House Web Site
While the public responded very favorably to the announcements from President Barack Obama, problems with the privacy practices of the new White House web site where the President's statements are posted emerged. One columnist noted a tracking feature associated with YouTube that violated a long-standing rule to limit the use of persistent cookies in the federal government. Information was collected from even those users who never clicked the "play" button on the Whitehouse website. The White House Counsel's office also issued a waiver to allow for the use of these persistent cookies. However, soon after the blog, the embedded videos were changed to linked pictures which limited the risk of cookies to those who only played the video. Additionally, a link was added to download the videos and bypass the cookies altogether.
The White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov
White House exempts YouTube from privacy rules: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13739_3-10147726-46.html
White House acts to limit YouTube cookie tracking: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13739_3-10148844-46.html
EPIC's page on Cookies: http://epic.org/privacy/internet/cookies/
"The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals" by Jane Mayer
The new President, Barack Obama, has come into Washington vowing to battle Islamic-extremist terrorism in a new way based on mutual respect, and has ordered the closing of Guantanamo Bay detention center and the C.I.A. secret prisons. So, now may be a good time to read a recap of the motivations and methods of the "War on Terror" pursued by the George W. Bush administration since September 11, 2001. The Dark Side is the story of the long-held desires of men such as Dick Cheney and other conservative ideologues to implement a new constitutional framework based on the "unitary executive" that allowed for the establishment of new methods of waging war such as extraordinary renditions, torture or "enhanced interrogations," and secret "black site" prisons. These disturbing methods of counter- terrorism intelligence gathering were, according to the author, created not so much a response to 9/11. Instead, the leaders of this nation used that day's events as a rationale for a harsher way of dealing with threats - a way that was illegal and unconstitutional in all but the most Orwellian of interpretations.
The book is an outright condemnation of torture not only because it is illegal under international law and inhumane, but also because little data exists that is effective at gathering accurate intelligence. In the end, the author considers the Bush "War on Terror" as probably the most aberrant response to a security threat ever supported as official U.S. government policy. That individuals, at first, queued up to volunteer as lawyers to draft legal justifications, as agents to commit torture, and as scientists to perfect the heinous methods of interrogation certainly says much about the darker side of human nature - making the title of the book apt. However, the book details a second war that was simultaneously going on within the executive branch agencies and the military by career employees repulsed by the shift towards illegality as official policy. These individuals highlight the good side of human nature, and give rise for hope that even in the darker periods of national panic and fear some more rationale voices of reason remain.
The Dark Side is a valuable addition to anyone's library that seeks to understand the past eight years – as unfortunately, "those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it."
by Nicholas Janney
"Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2008," edited by Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, and Mark S. Zaid (EPIC 2008). Price: $60.
Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the most comprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open access laws. This updated version includes new material regarding the substantial FOIA amendments enacted on December 31, 2007. Many of the recent amendments are effective as of December 31, 2008. The standard reference work includes in-depth analysis of litigation under Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, Federal Advisory Committee Act, Government in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated 2008 volume is the 24th edition of the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied on for more than 25 years.
"Information Privacy Law: Cases and Materials, Second Edition" Daniel J. Solove, Marc Rotenberg, and Paul Schwartz. (Aspen 2005). Price: $98.
This clear, comprehensive introduction to the field of information privacy law allows instructors to enliven their teaching of fundamental concepts by addressing both enduring and emerging controversies. The Second Edition addresses numerous rapidly developing areas of privacy law, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronic surveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more. Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive foundation for an exciting course in this rapidly evolving area of law.
"Privacy & Human Rights 2006: An International Survey of Privacy Laws
and Developments" (EPIC 2007). Price: $75.
This annual report by EPIC and Privacy International provides an overview of key privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over 75 countries around the world. The report outlines legal protections, new challenges, and important issues and events relating to privacy. Privacy & Human Rights 2006 is the most comprehensive report on privacy and data protection ever published.
"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit on the Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.
This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and the process of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). This reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and issue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals for future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts for individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in the WSIS process.
"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2004: United States Law, International Law, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2005). Price: $40.
The Privacy Law Sourcebook, which has been called the "Physician's Desk Reference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource for students, attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in pursuing privacy law in the United States and around the world. It includes the full texts of major privacy laws and directives such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Privacy Act, and the OECD Privacy Guidelines, as well as an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materials include the APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the CAN-SPAM Act.
"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.
A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering threatens free expression.
EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free expression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:
"EPIC Bookshelf" at Powell's Books
EPIC also publishes EPIC FOIA Notes, which provides brief summaries of interesting documents obtained from government agencies under the Freedom of Information Act.
Subscribe to EPIC FOIA Notes at: https:/mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/foia_notes
Department of Homeland Security Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory
Committee, Public Meeting, 9:00a.m. - noon, and 1:30p.m. to 4:00p.m.
February 26, 2009 at Galleries I and II of the Hilton Arlington
Hotel, 950 North Stafford Street, Arlington, Virginia
For more information,
2009 Freedom Forum Freedom of Information conference: "Freedom and Information: Looking Back and Looking Forward," 11th annual National FOI Day Conference, Freedom Forum’s Newseum, March 13, 2009. Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org or call 202/292-6288
The IAPP Privacy Summit 2009 will be held between March 11-13, 2009, at Washington, D.C. For more information, http://www.privacysummit.org
"Conference on International Aspects of Securing Personal Data," The Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C., March 16-17, 2009. For more information, http://ftc.gov/opa/2008/12/datasec.shtm
Notice and Request for Public Comments by the Federal Trade Commission
on Digital Rights Management Technologies.
March 25, 2009, Seattle, WA.
For more information,
"2nd Privacy OS Conference," MediaCentre, Berlin, Germany, April 1-3, 2009. For more information, http://www.privacyos.eu
"THE FUTURE OF PRIVACY: What’s Next?" - a one day seminar.
April 28, 2009, Cartier Suites Hotel, 180 Cooper Street,
For more information,
"2nd Annual Research Symposium for the Identity, Privacy and Security Initiative," , May 6, 2009, University of Toronto. For more information, http://www.ipsi.utoronto.ca/site4.aspx
IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, May 17-20, 2009,
The Claremont Resort, Oakland, California. For more information,
Web 2.0 Security & Privacy 2009, Thursday, May 21,
The Claremont Resort, Oakland, California. For more information,
Computers, Freedom, and Privacy, 19th Annual Conference, Washington,
D.C., June 1-4, 2009. For more information,
Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface: https://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/epic_news
Back issues are available at:
The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.
The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to send notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share our mailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal process seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link to other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.
In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription information."
The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts policy research. For more information, see http://www.epic.org or write EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax).
If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, contributions are welcome and fully tax-deductible. Checks should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you can contribute online at:
Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of encryption and expanding wiretapping powers.
Thank you for your support.