Mobile technology is now widely used in almost all private and public organizations. The use of smartphones or tablets has made it very convenient for people to manage data. Doctors and other health care professionals are now using these gadgets for electronic health records. These tools, as observers point out, lack the much needed, required security. Working on their own, some doctors are using these gadgets without ample knowledge on the use of encryption technology, or even passwords.

A spokesperson for the American Health Information Management Association said that there is a need for education and awareness. He admitted that there are ongoing trainings on the use of mobile technology in relation to data management. But according to him, these are not the same as education and awareness. Something else must be done if health professionals are to have the right awareness when it comes to patient data security.

At present, it is surprising to note that 4 out of 10 health care professionals surveyed are confident that patient data accessed by mobile devices is secured. It is also astounding to know that 81% of them are using these devices to collect, store and transmit patient records. But the most shocking of all is that almost one-half of the participants surveyed said that their organizations do not have a data protection mechanism at all.

In the United States, at least two regions have reported a large increase in identity crimes, most of which are data breaches. The cost of information that is stolen from companies costs more than $150 billion in the national picture. This was reported by LifeLock Consumer Education that spanned the years from 2005 to 2010. The theory is that this is a result of technology that criminals take advantage of, plus human error on the part of consumers.

Studying the number of data breaches, it can be said that in the U.S., there were more than 800 million records exposed from 2005 to 2010. Analysis of this data reveals that 15% of these were credit card fraud and 9% were bank fraud. One interesting fact to note is that credit card fraud takes the major percentage of the crime. The reason can be attributed to the story of one shopper who experienced identity theft two years ago. Since that distressing experience, she said that she uses her credit cards only occasionally. She added that she has not gotten over that incident. She did not know how her identity was stolen in such a short time. Even now, she still cannot be sure if clerks or waiters will really run her card through genuine credit card readers.

Even the status of identity-related crimes on state highways is also worsening. Police records show that identity crime arrests have increased by 53 percent in the past three years. These can be broken down into forgery, falsification, using a fake driver’s license, giving a fictitious name to an officer, or signing a false name on statements.

There are doubts about supermarkets collecting a great deal of consumer data via electronic shopper cards or e-cards. This vast amount of information could then be combined with other biometric technology. With some data processing, a person’s in-depth personal database could be easily built. All of this could occur without the consent or knowledge of the person concerned.

What is the big deal about shopping cards getting onto the list of items that pose privacy risks? Studies were conducted to find out how stores can attract people to use their cards. Card experts say that shoppers do not receive special benefits with e-cards, despite the good offers. There is no real savings because the prices of the items that are included in the “deals” are usually marked up.

The several studies conducted that compared the prices of items in stores that offered e-card discounts and those that did not, showed the true story. Out of the 89 stores that were involved in the price tracking, only 13 really had lower prices. There were 52 stores that had their prices unchanged, and 24 had even higher prices. A spokesperson from Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering (CASPIAN) said something that consumers have to think about. Some stores just use these card discount programs as ploys so that shoppers will use their cards. The reality is that there are retailers who collect shoppers’ personal data.

Although these are all just suspicions, there is some truth in them. This was admitted by one employee of a company that collects and analyzes shopper data. She said that her company’s involvement in shopper card programs is “risk-free”. She explained that customers are tracked based only on UPC number and frequent shopper card number. The company’s sole intention is to use this data in order to get a picture of what shoppers typically buy and give them offers based on this information. She stated that the company does not, in any way, collect any personally identifiable information.

Consumers are expected to think hard the next time they are given such e-card offers. Before finally deciding to use their cards, they have to consider if it is worth their privacy. Without their knowledge, they might be providing personal information to retailers and other interested parties. They have to remember that their e-cards contain vital information. Unscrupulous people who can get hold of this information can use it to the disadvantage of the shopper.

Supporters of the revision say that there is a need to update the law’s provisions. They say that today’s breed of teenagers is not mature enough to evaluate and be aware of the dangerous aspects of the internet. They observe that children are becoming more technologically advanced. This makes it possible for them to effortlessly cope with the fast changing technology. What they lack is the ability to self-regulate in time with existing technology. This can result in privacy problems, thus the need to include children in the higher age bracket.

Websites and other providers are required to obtain verifiable approval from parents before they can collect information from children. This means that the consent must be proven to have been given by the parents. The revised consent will use more sophisticated verification methods. Examples are video-conferencing and electronic scans of consent forms, which would be signed by parents. Lack of this evidence will prohibit the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information of children.

The privacy protection rules apply when children are on a cellular phone, playing interactive games online, or participating in a virtual community. Millions of users are flocking to Facebook, Twitter and Google+. This is what signaled the call to change the age threshold. One of the emerging problems is online privacy, which has been brought up by parents regarding their own children.

Some critics say that lawmakers should be aware of the downside of extending the age bracket. The issue is about the inevitable increase in the number of children lying about their age. Many children would claim that they are over 18 years old just to evade any restrictions placed on them. Others are cautious about the possible infringement of children’s rights as stipulated in the First Amendments. Whatever lawmakers decide, the important matter is that children’s privacy must never be forgotten.

Hindi nauunawaan ng karamihan sa mga mahihilig sa internet na maaari silang makulong kapag sila ay nagbibigay ng pekeng impormasyon tungkol sa kanilang sarili. Sa pamamagitan ng blog na ito, ang mga gumagamit ng Facebook ay mag-iisip muna ng maraming beses. Maaaring nakatatawa o parang walang halaga, subalit marami nang ganitong mga kaso. Maraming internet users ang naparusahan dahil sa paglabag sa “terms of use” ng isang website na hindi naman talaga binabasa.

Sa ngayon, ang ganitong batas ukol sa “cybersecurity” ay maaari pang palawakin ng U.S. Congress. Matatandaang mayroon nang Computer Fraud and Abuse Act na naipasa sa bansa noon pang 1986. Ito ay sumasaklaw sa lalo pang lumalaganap na computer hacking. Ang batas na ito ay nirerebisa at pinalalawak tuwing nakatakdang panahon. Sa ngayon may posibilidad na ito’y sumakop nang mas malawak na saklaw kaysa sa hacking lamang.

May posibilidad nga ituring na isang krimen ang paglabag ng isang internet user sa “authorized access”. Ito’y mangangahulugang ang isang user ay hindi dapat lumagpas sa mga itinakdang kondisyon ng may-ari ng website. Ang anumang paglabag ay magkakaroon ng pananagutang krimen, lalo na’t kapag ito ay nangyari sa loob ng isang workplace.

Ang mga pangyayaring ito ay magbubukas ng mga mata ng mga mahihilig gumamit ng pekeng pangalan o edad sa kanilang mga accounts. Kapag naging ganap na batas sa U.S., ang pagsisinungaling sa internet ay magiging isang krimen. Magpapataw ito ng kaukulang parusa sa sinumang mapapatunayan at tatawaging “felony”.

Sa mga nakaraang taon, marami nang nga kasong tulad nito ang inihain ng mga pribadong tao. Parang nakatatawa pero dininig ng korte. May isang employer na inihabla ang isang dating empleyado dahil sa paggamit nito ng email ng kompanya sa personal na dahilan. May isang may-ari ng website ang naglagay sa kanyang “terms of use” na bawal bumisita ang mga kakompetensya. Totoo nga, dahil may isang sumubok at siya ay inihabla ng may-ari.

Upang maiwasan ang mga pang-aabuso, may mga mungkahi tungkol dito. Dapat munang maging maliwanag ang mga “parameters” kung ano talaga ang maituturing na felony. Oo nga’t dapat parusahan ang maysala, subalit dapat namang maging makatao ang batas. Hindi naman maganda na mapupuno lang ang mga korte nga mga kasong ang puno’t dulo’y ang hindi pagtupad sa isang pangako.

The data has been on a commercial website for almost a year already, but the breach was discovered only last month. A hospital representative said that the data first appeared on that website on September 9, 2010. This makes it hard for hospital officials to tell exactly who committed the offense. There are many third parties who can actually gain access to this hospital data, and it could be any one of them.

There are many policies and regulations in place that oblige companies to publicly reveal data breaches. These laws impose heavy fines to give strength to such legislations. Experts on medical security connect the breach on the presence of too many outside contractors that are able to gain access to private hospital data.

In the abovementioned case, records of 20,000 patients, which included their names, diagnosis codes, admission and discharge dates, and billing charges, were involved. This belonged to the hospital’s emergency room patients during a six-month period in 2009. It is assumed that hackers could not use the data to steal personal information. This is because it did not contain personally identifiable data that hackers need to successfully do their “job”.

According to the hospital spokesperson, they exhaust all means to keep information confidential and private. He also added that they do all they can just to make certain that all information remains in their good hands. The result of the data breach has gone public so they are expecting that privacy questions will be raised against the hospital.

There is an ongoing inquiry being conducted by the hospital, and its efforts are centered on one of its vendors. They are also expecting that the Federal Department of Health would conduct its own investigation, but a department representative did not give a definite answer on whether they are holding one. Only the person behind the wrongdoing knows the reason why he or she posted this apparently useless data online.

This past week, Facebook publicized that it is giving its millions of users more enhanced privacy control. These changes will be out on the internet in the coming days, and users will be given an opportunity to try them when they become available. The new privacy features will, as a whole, make it easier for users to know what people will see about them online and who will see their posts.

Users can easily know who can see all that they post with just a few clicks. They can also opt to block photos that are unwanted, and those items tagged by others from their profile page. Facebook hopes to see that users will have more understanding of these settings by changing such terms from “everyone” to “public”. Users used to think that “everyone” simply meant everyone on the social networking site. The term really meant every person on the internet.

Some analysts noted Facebook’s move towards enhancing customer approval. They say that social networking buffs have long been asking for services that would allow them to plainly see what content is posted. Analysts said that Google+ was able to avoid Facebook’s privacy pitfalls. The former was successful in giving users easier control when it comes to sharing of content. Facebook said that their privacy improvement was not triggered by Google’s success in providing more acceptable privacy features.

Another policy analyst commented that there is a growing rivalry in the area of privacy between these two companies. Eventually, this development will move towards allowing users to gain more control over content sharing. Other observers commented that in order to avoid backfiring, policies should be clear. If controls are too complex for users to comprehend and use, bigger issues can be expected. The first few right steps have been taken by Facebook, but it has to take a lot more towards user privacy protection.

A recent survey among users found a new, emerging trend in fraud consciousness. A privacy research firm and a fraud prevention provider joined efforts in the survey. In their report, the survey found out that 85% of users today worry about becoming an online fraud victim. Compared with 80% in the last similar survey that they conducted, this new figure posted a significant increase. The survey asked the respondents about identity theft, credit card scams, spam, phishing, and others.

The results also tell that users want web retailers to intensify their efforts in combating online fraud. Furthermore, they urge retailers to do their best to stop online criminals from stealing consumer information. They even said that they are willing to be identified online by trusted sites. They suggested the use of computer serial number, ISP, computer type and make for authentication purposes. This will replace the usual personally identifiable information like telephone number and date of birth, which are relatively not safe.

It is only now that online businesses are paying attention to the prominence and seriousness of online fraud. Much of the incidents have not been properly reported, although these have been going on for a long time. There is a tremendous increase in online transactions and activities using various devices. Along with this upsurge is the onslaught of fraudulent activities. With these occurrences, users might have realized the need for their protection, given that many have already been victims.

The survey involved 607 respondents who are regular internet users. Out of these users, 42% admitted that they have already been victims of fraud. It is sad to note that out of these victims, 81% did not take any action to report the crime. Although there is an increasing awareness of fraud protection, there is still a need for more consumer education. This should focus on how to avoid online fraud and the right action to take in case they become victims.

The online advertising industry has been advocating for self-regulation. It has not reacted positively to discussions in regards to privacy protection. There have been many proposals for enhanced privacy policies that protect individual privacy. This recent development will mark the beginning of giving users more control over their personal information.

Many users do not realize the possible consequences of sharing their personal information online. They do not take time to thoroughly read the website’s privacy policies. It is either that they do not understand how their data will be handled, or they do not realize the importance of understanding. Only when they receive unsolicited advertisements – a consequence for being careless – do they realize the need for privacy protection.

Tech companies still continue to look for better revenue generation strategies. They will enhance online advertising which, they admit, are the ones that fuel the web. They do this by meeting halfway between privacy and revenue generation through advertising. Some privacy experts say that this will be the start of a better privacy discussion with and among tech companies.

Google’s free Keep My Opt-Outs extension can now be downloaded from the Chrome Web Store. This new feature will give users significant control over their data, a company spokesperson said. On the other hand, Mozilla is now ready with its own opt-out tool for its Firefox browser. The company will use the Do Not Track HTTP header, something different from what the other companies did. It will be released soon, but no exact date was given for the integration of the new technology with the browser.

Microsoft, Mozilla and Google are applying different approaches, but they all attempt to give more privacy to internet users. Ample time is needed to tell which among the three approaches will lead, or which one will be ineffective. The good thing is that these companies have opened the possibilities for improving user privacy protection through more discussions. The remaining days of 2011 are enough to achieve the goals. Users will be assured of more reliable privacy protection technology.

Generally, there are two types of weight loss claims that are sent through spam mail. The first one claims that a product such as a pill, cream, patch, or others can guarantee weight loss even without dieting or exercise. The second are those that claim to block fat absorption, calories or carbohydrates so you don’t gain weight.

What makes weight loss spam mails interesting is revealed by a New York-based research. One in five, or 20%, of young, overweight people have been victims of email spam. The research also revealed more related statistics about these mails. First, 88% of overweight individuals say they received spam that “sells” weight loss products as opposed to 73% of other respondents. Second, 42% of overweight individuals say they opened these emails compared to 18% of other respondents. Third, 18% of overweight individuals say they bought these products, while only 5% of other respondents did the same.

You might ask why more overweight people get this particular spam. Experts explain that these people visit more weight loss sites than other people so they end up in the databases of these sites. Additionally, they also provide their personal information to these websites. Consequently, these spam emails might come from two sources. These might be from the website owner itself, or from a third party that has access to the owner’s database.

Spam works because users give all the information they need to make it work. Do you consider the personal information that you upload to sites that are not trustworthy? Even a simple “I want to lose weight” post on a social networking site can send the right signal to a spammer. Keep in mind the 42% open rate and 18% conversion rate of weight loss spam. For example, a spammer will send mail to 1,000 targeted individuals. Let us say, because of anti-spam protection, 420 will be able to receive and open the mail. If only 100 individuals do so, with the 18% conversion rate, it means 18 individuals will buy the product. If the unit cost is $50, an income of $900 for the spammer is good enough.

The best way to avoid spam is to be vigilant with websites and careful with your personal information. One way of doing this is to not easily give up your email address. Social networking sites have privacy settings that you can use to control your personal data. Finally, follow the experts’ advice on losing weight. You have to use more energy by increasing your physical activity while eating fewer calories.