How much do you trust that bouncer?

Australian nightclubs feel they are leading the way in scanning and retaining ID's, and even biometric data, of patrons.

No, it isn't a joke.

The more sophisticated will of course throw their heads back and laugh before walking down the street to a club with a clue. Giving a nightclub operator carte blanche to steal the patron's ID, or to lose it to a thieving employee with virtually no consequence, is not smart.

Privacy concerns as clubs roll out ID scanning - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

"Nightclub operators, and private business in general, are not qualified to hold your ID. Show it to them, but never hand it to them. Refuse, deny, walk out. If you operate such an establishment, understand the liability of allowing your employees to demand this info. One cell phone photo of an ID, and it's over for you." - Jonathan Warren

Privacy Settings: Don't blame your tools for your work results

Articles regarding privacy evaporation, and blaming the phenomenon on social networks, makes for lots of readers. But the reality is, the social networks are seldom to blame for the embarrassing and often dangerous positions people put themselves in regarding online information sharing.

A review of privacy settings can virtually eliminate the risk of unwanted sharing. Like anything else, users need to make sure they understand the powerful tool of a Twitter or Facebook account before they begin using it. Yes, you have to read.

Linkedin, Facebook, Plaxo, Twitter, Myspace and others actually provide some of the best methods for perserving personal privacy, when they are utilized properly. In fact, many use these services instead of standard email because they mask your IP address to the public, and are capable of offering just the information you want to be presented to the public at large. They also allow you to cut off or prevent communications from any user with a simple click.

Don't Blame Facebook for the Erosion of Online Privacy - Business - The Atlantic

To review your privacy settings and your overall presentation, have a trusted friend or a personal privacy consultant go through your social networking membership page, and provide feedback. A professional can tell you what information can be gleaned from your entries, which is critical in protecting yourself online.

Lifelock to pay $12 Million in False ID Theft Protection Claims Settlement

"...Protection actually provided left enough holes that you could drive a truck through it" - FTC

03.09.2010 International Association of Privacy Professionals--/

In a press conference held Tuesday, March 9, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman Jon Leibowitz and Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan announced that LifeLock, Inc., has agreed to pay $11 million to the FTC and $1 million to a group of 35 state attorneys general to settle charges that the company’s claims of providing 100-percent protection against identity theft were false.


“While LifeLock promised consumers complete protection against all types of identity theft, in truth, the protection it actually provided left enough holes that you could drive a truck through it,” Leibowitz said.


In addition to the $12 million settlement, LifeLock and its co-founders Richard Todd Davis and Robert J. Maynard, Jr. are prohibited from making deceptive claims and required to better safeguard customers’ personal information.


According to the FTC’s complaint, LifeLock’s claims included protecting against identity theft “ever happening to you” and being “the first company to prevent identity theft from occurring.” The FTC, however, contended that LifeLock’s practice of placing fraud alerts on its customers’ credit reports only protected them against specific types of ID theft, but had no effect on the most common form: the misuse of existing credit card and bank accounts.


“There is nothing you can do or purchase that will provide you with a 100-percent
guarantee against identity theft,” Madigan said during Tuesday’s announcement, urging consumers to be aware of the steps they can take to protect their personal information. “Most of what they did you can do on your own, and you can do it for free.”


In addition to what the FTC described as deceptive identity theft protection claims, Leibowitz noted that LifeLock’s own data security practices did not adequately protect its customers’ information.


According to an FTC press release issued after Tuesday’s conference, LifeLock routinely collected sensitive information from its customers, including their Social Security numbers and credit card numbers, but did not encrypt the data. Additionally, the FTC alleges, “sensitive consumer information was not shared only on a ‘need to know’ basis…the company’s data system was vulnerable and could have been exploited by those seeking access to customer information.”


The FTC has confirmed it will use the $11 million it receives from the settlements to provide refunds to consumers. For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/lifelock.

— Jennifer L. Saunders IAPP

Local Governments Not Qualified to Handle Personal Data

Yet another example of local government offices unqualified to handle personally identifiable information.

THINK TWICE before you turn over any personal document or information to local government, or even worse, any government contractor.

FULL STORY:

Confidential information abandoned in forgotten Houseing Authority building

Court: IP Addresses Are Not 'Personally Identifiable' Information 07/07/2009

MediaPost Publications Court: IP Addresses Are Not 'Personally Identifiable' Information 07/07/2009

Watch your back! Ip addresses are now considered public. The judge who decided this probably does not realize that anyone now can pull his IP address off of his email, and come to his home.

Is it Personally Identifiable Information then?

If you would rather mask your IP address, go to http://jonathanwarren.wordpress.com/.