Technology Privacy Commissioner wants more protections for individuals in Data Availability Bill
To fix social media now focus on privacy, not platforms
This is not the time for Congress to give up or be distracted by other “techlash” issues.Some blame Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms for giving Trump and other extremists a medium to spread the "stop the steal" lie and plan for a "wild" protest in Washington before the event. And afterward, others accuse them of politically-motivated censorship for shutting off Trump's account and others. Meanwhile, a House committee plans to increase scrutiny of social media companies in response to the invasion of the Capitol.
The Australian Information Commissioner and Privacy Commissioner's office, the OAIC, has asked for the inclusion of additional privacy measures in the Bill that would allow the sharing of data held by government.
Thepresented in the Data Availability and Transparency Bill 2020 are touted by Minister for Government Services Stuart Robert as being an opportunity to establish a new framework that is able to proactively assist in designing better services and policies.
Apple comes out swinging against Facebook over data privacy
In thinly veiled jabs, Apple CEO Tim Cook lays into the social network over "data exploitation."On Thursday, Apple CEO Tim Cook appeared on an international Data Privacy Day panel to tout Apple's latest privacy features and assail social media companies like Facebook over privacy flaws.
The Bill, as well as the Data Availability and Transparency (Consequential Amendments) Bill, were both introduced to Parliament in December, after two years of consultation.
"Proposals to share data containing personal information will necessarily carry certain privacy risks, including the loss of control by individuals and the potential for mishandling of personal information," the OAIC said in its[PDF] to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee currently probing the two Bills.
"Privacy risks can be heightened in relation to government-held personal information, which is often collected on a compulsory basis to enable individuals to receive a service or benefit or is otherwise required by law."
Facebook is about to beg you to let it keep tracking you on your iPhone
Facebook confirmed that it would comply with Apple’s new privacy rules on iPhone and iPad and shows its users prompts asking for permission to track them and show personalized ads. Facebook insists that Apple’s new privacy rules in iOS 14 will hurt small businesses, and it will show a screen of its own to convince people to continue to let it track them across apps. Facebook will continue showing apps even if users decline to be tracked, but they won’t be personalized. Facebook launched a full-scale attack on Apple in December on account of the new privacy protections rolling out to iPhone and iPad users.
The submission raised concerns that such data is often sensitive or can become sensitive when it is linked with other government datasets.
It, therefore, has recommended the inclusion of additional privacy measures that would provide further protections for individuals and clarity for data scheme entities about their privacy obligations.
"The OAIC considers that these additional measures are necessary to ensure the proportionality of the scheme and to achieve the trust and confidence of the community, which is vital to the success of the DAT scheme," it wrote.
In a discussion paper in September 2019, the federal government tweaked what it proposed the year prior by-- consent.
The government's position on consent has since become more nuanced, with the Bill currently stating that any sharing of personal information is to be done with the consent of the individuals, unless it is unreasonable or impracticable.
COVID app triggers overdue debate on privacy in Singapore
Government forced to amend law around app after it emerges police used the data to investigate a number of crimes.Now, COVID-19 has forced the conversation, after it was revealed that data from the government’s contact-tracing app, contrary to initial promises, could also be used for criminal investigations.
"While the OAIC acknowledges the important privacy safeguards that have been included in the DAT Bill, there are other key privacy protective measures that should be included to further mitigate the risks posed by sharing personal information," the OAIC said.
Additionally, the OAIC is concerned about the proposed exemption of scheme data from the Freedom of Information Act, which the OAIC considers runs counter to the objects of both the FOI Act and the Data Availability and Transparency Bill.
It said this would effectively exempt any data that government agencies share with each other through the scheme.
"The OAIC is concerned that the proposal is unnecessarily broad and risks misalignment with the objects of the FOI Act to provide a fundamental legal right to access to documents," the submission continued. "The OAIC is also concerned that this proposal reduces the information access rights of individuals, impacting on their ability to seek access to their own personal information and understand how agencies are using this information."
Virginia set to become second state to pass data privacy law
Virginia is set to become the second state after California to pass data privacy legislation. The bill could become law as soon April when Gov. Ralph Northam is expected to sign a measure that has passed both chambers of the state legislature but is awaiting a few last-minute tweaks. Known as the Consumer Data Protection […] The post Virginia set to become second state to pass data privacy law appeared first on Roll Call.
As a result, the OAIC recommended that the proposed consequential amendment to the FOI Act be removed, and that data shared by agencies under the scheme remains subject to the usual FOI processes and potential exemptions under the FOI Act.
Elsewhere, the OAIC recommended that all accredited users – including Commonwealth bodies -- are subject to the same accreditation processes and criteria as other entities seeking to become accredited under the Data Availability and Transparency scheme.
Further, the OAIC has asked for definitions in the Bill to be consistent with those in the Privacy Act 1988, for example, the definition of "de-identified". It also recommended that additional protections be included in the Data Availability and Transparency Bill to ensure that the "exit mechanism" minimise the risk to individuals' privacy and is only used in specific and confined circumstances.
Digital Rights Watch is similarly concerned that the Bill is moving ahead in parallel to the, which the Attorney-General's office is currently heading. In its [PDF] to the committee, the organisation said as the draft text stands, the Bill "threatens to further erode the limited protections enshrined in the existing Privacy Act".
Rep. DelBene introduces federal privacy bill in latest effort to avoid ‘patchwork’ of state laws
U.S. Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wa, introduced new federal privacy legislation, warning that efforts by states to enact their own privacy laws threaten to deepen the country’s privacy predicament. © Provided by Geekwire Rep. Suzan DelBene discusses at the 2018 GeekWire Summit. (GeekWire Photo / Kevin Lisota) Among other provisions, the bill would require companies to let consumers know when their personal information is shared, and with whom, with the goal of increasing overall transparency. DelBene has championed the cause repeatedly with past attempts to pass federal privacy legislation.
"The Bill would make it easier for government agencies to share data containing personal information with each other, allowing any government entity to access any and all the information the government holds about an individual," it explained.
"The draft also permits the government to share data with accredited third parties and researchers. In absolute terms, the Bill almost constitutes an amendment of the Australian Privacy Principle 6 by redefining and altogether eliminating the limitations and protections the principle currently imposes on the data custodians."
Digital Rights Watch has also asked the Bill restrict the access of accredited parties from the single-application full access system proposed; define consent in line with international standards as presented under the GDPR, as one example; and maintain liability for data breaches, ensuring also a resolution mechanism for individuals who may want to seek redress if their data and privacy is compromised through the scheme.
Also making a[PDF] was the Australian Privacy Foundation (APF), which considers the Bill as possessing weak legitimacy, that it erodes trust, and that it provides uncertain benefits alongside a history of underperformance.
"The foundations of the proposed regime are weak, the superstructure is weaker," APF wrote.
"The proposed regime does not provide the necessary 'strong privacy and security foundations'. Instead it embodies values of bureaucratic convenience that are antithetical to strong privacy protection."
MORE FROM THE OAIC
Facial recognition tech is supporting mass surveillance. It's time for a ban, say privacy campaigners .
A group of 51 organizations has written an open letter to European commissioners calling for the ban of all deployments of facial recognition tools that can snoop on citizens.Comprising activist groups from across the continent, such as Big Brother Watch UK, AlgorithmWatch and the European Digital Society, the call was chaperoned by advocacy network the European Digital Rights (EDRi) in the form of an open letter to the European commissioner for Justice, Didier Reynders.