Identity theft has continuously posed danger to Internet users. People are trying to look for ways about how they can protect themselves. Some technologically adept users do it by themselves, but others would still depend on experts for advice. Plain internet users end up as easy targets of people who make money by using other people’s identity. There are numerous possibilities of problems that could be avoided only if these users knew how to protect themselves.

The vice president and director of both Governance Studies and the Center for Technology Innovation in Washington, Darrell West, gives expert advice. He has given instructions to people about how they can protect themselves in the digital world. West has also written articles on other fields like political, policy and legal challenges raised by digital technology.

His instructions focus on the sound ways of maintaining online protection. For him, the best way is “choosing non-obvious passwords” and using different passwords for different accounts. Passwords such as partner’s name, date of birth, hometown, and other obvious personal information only invite problems. With the popularity of social networking and other public sites, clearly these data are now online. Data marketers could simply do some tricks and they could intrude one’s privacy.

On grounds of privacy, four police officers are suing so that their personal cellphone records cannot be obtained. The unauthorized circulation of a photo of a man killed while resisting arrest prompted the authorities to conduct an investigation on them. The four officers sued in order to block the search of their cellphones. However, there is no direct denial from them that they had nothing to do with the distribution of the controversial photo.

One of the four officers admitted at the police office that he used his cellphone to take the picture of Carlos Boles. The 35-year-old man died of a gunshot while he was resisting arrest in a house at Osage Street, St. Louis. During the commotion, Deputy U.S. Marshal John Perry was also killed. A third one, a city police officer, was also wounded.

Attorney John Bouhasin chose not to reveal how many among the four officers were involved. He only gave a hint that “some have admitted seeing and forwarding the photo”. He also filed a petition for a restraining order. The investigation focuses on which among the four officers forwarded the pictures to others. It rapidly spread through emails or short message service (SMS). The picture eventually reached the Post-Dispatch and some television stations. However, these entities found the picture so graphic that they decided not to use it.

The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation is managing a series of committee hearings. This pertains to the state of online consumer privacy; the first one was conducted last March 16, 2011. The hearing mainly revolved around online commercial practices. It tried to look into practices that involve collecting, maintaining, using and disseminating large volumes of consumer information. These may also involve those that are very private and confidential in nature.

Testimonies were given by several persons. The first one who testified was FTC Chairman Liebowitz. He described latest efforts by the FTC to guard consumer privacy. FTC is doing this through law enforcement, education, and policy initiatives. Then he added some highlights from the Staff Report on consumer privacy. Finally he discussed concerns related to the “Do Not Track” proposal. He itemized five vital principles that any “Do Not Track” proposal should contain.

First, a Do Not Track system should be implemented universally. This would free consumers from continually opting out of tracking on several sites. Second, consumers should find the choice mechanism user-friendly. This means that any user should find navigation simple and easy to use. Third, the system should be persistent and should always present the options in each attempt. It should not be easily deleted when a user clears his or her cookies or updates the browser. Fourth, it should be able to allow users to opt out of advertising and tracking at the same time. Fifth, it should not contain loopholes, be enforceable and effective.

The “Pirates” are finally taking their place in Massachusetts. Yes, the Massachusetts Election Division has approved the Massachusetts Pirate Party as a political designation. With this development, a voter in the state can now register as a “Pirate”. It could be recalled that the United States Pirate Party was formed in 2006. However, time passed without the party being registered or officially recognized in any state.

Having been given the official approval, the party can already start working toward its vision and mission. The party has always openly voiced out its ideals and tried to live up to these. It endeavors to “increase government transparency, promote personal privacy, reinforce the spread of knowledge through copyright reform, and abolish patents.

One of the major reforms that the party strives to have is in personal privacy. It has criticized the government’s use of the 9/11 incident to increase its surveillance and control over citizens. It has mentioned the PATRIOT ACT, wiretapping, surveillance cameras as some of the government’s ways of curtailing privacy of people. It has also mentioned how corporations increase their spying in order to get more work out of their employees.

Yes, pedestrians and people at rail and bus stations and special events venues are being scanned. They are subjected to x-rays that may be harmful to health without their knowledge. This is a clear issue of privacy invasion that has just been recently disclosed.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has obtained documents that imply an existence of contracts. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has called some providers to develop new mobile and static scanning systems. Intended specifically for detection of explosives, the contract signed was worth millions of dollars.

EPIC was able to obtain the documents from the DHS through a request filed last year under the Freedom of Information Act. Siemens Corporate Research and Northeastern University were tasked on a special assignment. They are to propose and develop an Intelligent Pedestrian Surveillance platform. The contract specified one that could detect improvised explosive devices concealed in backpacks and under clothing.

With Facebook’s announcement of their plan last January, users are alarmed and threatened as to their online security. The company has just made public that it plans to allow third-party developers to gain access to users’ data. It was made clear that Facebook would only allow access to home addresses and phone numbers of users. At first it would appear there is nothing to worry about “letting loose” of such data. Others would even say “What’s big about addresses and phone numbers”?

Many groups and even individuals have raised concerns, asking Facebook to stop its plans. Some even wrote personal letters to CEO Mark Zuckerberg urging him to drop the idea. The issue seems to be so urgent that it has started a massive campaign rejecting the plan. Even those users who know less about identity theft have also expressed their fear. It is true data behavioral tracking is not new. Many data marketing companies have amassed much money out of data that they have covertly collected. However, with Facebook’s plan of “freely” giving out user information, these companies do not have to “hide” their secret activities. On the other side, users will be open and helpless targets of people who could hurt them.

It may be good information to know what could be done with a user’s phone number and home address. Anyone with ample knowledge on data mining techniques would know that these two hold more than that information. These would open to other user information such as date of birth, e-mail address, or even estimated income. An identity theft could mine practically all other data he would need for his or her hidden agenda. The thief could apply for a loan or credit card in the name of the unsuspicious Facebook user.

Alejandra Sosa and two other students of Chapel Hill Middle School were suspended by Douglas County School officials. The decision said that the three violated school policies and hence were penalized. In addition to suspension, harsher punishment may be be meted against them. There is possibility that they would be sent away to a school for children with behavior problem.

It all started when Alejandra posted a comment against one of her teachers. She called the teacher a pedophile online. She thought at first it was just a joke, but it got out of control. The ensuing comments posted by her classmates aggravated the situation. One of them called the teacher a rapist. When the “news” about the hot issue spread, the children were bound to face penalty.

Alejandra felt sorry over what she did and said that she will apologize to her teacher through a letter. She made clear that she did it because she was mad at one of her teachers. When she arrived home one day she posted the offensive comment on Facebook. Her classmates who have read it responded and posted other unkind comments.

Yasir Afifi has been under surveillance for quite a long time before accidentally discovering it himself. Afifi is a community college student who believed he did not do anything wrong. He filed a lawsuit against the FBI agents who secretly put a GPS device on his car. It was discovered only when the 20-year old American-born student of Egyptian descent brought his car to a mechanic.

The device was found during an oil change. It was securely “stuck with magnets between the right rear wheel and exhaust”. They were not able to identify the device so they posted some photos of it online. They were hoping that somebody could identify it. While he was driving two days later, he was pulled over by agents who were wearing bullet-proof vests. They demanded that he return the gadget to them.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations helped Afifi file a lawsuit. He claimed that the FBI violated his civil rights by placing the device without warrant. According to his lawyers, his Middle East roots and frequent travels there might have triggered such action. He is supporting two brothers who live in Egypt. His father who died last year was a well-known Islamic-American community leader.

Every once and awhile we see interesting extensions for Firefox or Chrome. Recently we came across Adblock Plus. According to their marketing, they block those annoying little ads. But here’s the reason you should consider using this. Recently there have been instances where ads have led to viruses.

That’s right, Viruses. Here’s what happens. You see an ad that looks like a system message. It’s not! Typically these ads talk about your PC being infected. Being concerned you click on the ad to get your free scan; this is a really bad idea. That’s how viruses get installed on your PC.

Of course, one solution is not to click on the ad in the first place. However, if you are like many people out there, you are not always on guard. So you see the message, get concerned and click.

Another solution is to block the ads in the first place. So here are two links for you so you can try Adblock Plus:

Adblock Plus for Chrome

Adblock Plus for FireFox

Online tracking is used to collect very important information from web users. Data gathered could be used by companies that do target advertising. Effective marketing strategies could surely boost revenues of these companies. It used to be that data gathering was done through surveys of readers’ preferences and applications. Online tracking was born as modern technology developed and flourished. Today, marketing firms collect data easily by just monitoring a user’s online “movements”.

In its earlier days, online data collection from users seemed safe. Privacy issues started to appear as more and more internet marketing companies made use of such technique. Maintaining privacy in the web became more and more difficult. A user’s online behavior is left unguarded, making him or her “target” for internet advertising companies. Claims of unlawful intrusiveness by internet data gradually became commonplace. Users questioned whether such technique could be considered legal. Others contend that such actions are violations of individual privacy.

User data that go online hold so much important information with huge marketing potentials. As a whole, these contain not only the user’s data but also those of his or her friends, linkages, locations, and influences. Just some simple manipulations, these could reveal not only what the individual user wants but also those of his or her friends. In general, there are many possibilities of abusing these data.