EFF Files Complaint with FTC Over AOL Data Leak

Quincy A. writes "Last week's exposure of search data on over 500,000 AOL users was a gigantic embarrassment for the company. It may be about to get worse, as the EFF has filed a complaint with the FTC over the incident. 'Citing AOL's own Network Privacy Policy, the EFF says that the company failed to "implement reasonable and appropriate measures to protect personal consumer information from public disclosure."' Among other things, the complaint asks AOL to notify all users affected by the data disclosure via certified mail and provide free credit monitoring for a year."

Comments

While I am surprised the EFF took the case

[umm qasr]

I'm happy that AOL will be help *somewhat* accountable.

Re:While I am surprised the EFF took the case

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a good thing they'll face at least some minor repercussions, but it's a far cry from what should happen. At the minimum, AOL should be proscribed from logging this information in the future. More fairly, AOL should be forced to pay a hefty sum to each of its customers and be proscribed from logging the information again.

Neither of these things will happen, though. AOL will keep spying on its customers and selling the information, future customers will not be notified of this fact except perhaps in some microscopic-print contract term, and in a few weeks almost everyone will have forgotten.

Re:While I am surprised the EFF took the case

[Anonymous Coward]

As slashbots, I imagine it's safe to say that we're not fond of AOL nor AOLers to begin with, and that's ok. Part of me wants to cite Chuck Darwin on this one, but I also understand that if it could happen at AOL, it may happen elsewhere. That's why I'm cheering the EFF on -- to send the message to every other ISP/search engine out there who doesn't get it yet. The privacy of your customers is very important.

I must admit some of that data (if it weren't tied to ID's) could make for good sociology/psychology papers.

Re:While I am surprised the EFF took the case

[deviantphil]

The accountability they take in the future might be less than inspiring. From the article:

It is certain that AOL will vigorously contest the EFF's complaint, with the linchpin of its defense being that the whole thing was a horrible idea from AOL's new research unit that will never be repeated. Unfortunately, horrible ideas can have real-world ramifications, and even though AOL is "deeply sorry" and swears it will never happen again, there need to be some safeguards in place to prevent a recurrence.

I wonder what would happen to a murder defendant that tried to use that defense. "I'm sorry your Honor....my left hand pulled the trigger without my permission. It won't happen again! I promise!

Bottom line, respondeat superior says it is their unit, their employees, THE COMPANY is responsible.

Re:While I am surprised the EFF took the case

[anagama]

The problem is that it is the searches which are revealing. It isn't possible to release complete search data AND protect privacy of all users because people search for things that are important to them, i.e., the searches are self revealing. That's why replacing usernames with a numerical identifier was so ineffectual for so many users.

As an aside, I imported the data into a mysql database. I've never messed with that much data before and it was a good learning experience with respect to grep, awk, and sed and converting the tab deliminated files into something I could import into mysql. I do wonder however, if there is a way to just import the tab deliminated file without adding "insert" to lines and escaping the ' ( ) and ; characters that appear in the data. Any experts have a hint? On my athlon 2200+ with 512mb of ram, each search of the data takes about a minute to complete. It's actually faster to just grep for lower numbered userids and then kill grep once the output shows.

Re:While I am surprised the EFF took the case

[merreborn]

The mysqlimport command.

http://mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/mysqlimport.htm l

Re:While I am surprised the EFF took the case

[Neil Blender]

If the file has say, 5 columns that are tab delimited - make a table with five columns of the appropriate type

Then use this statement:

load data infile '/path/to/file/file.txt' into table name_of_table;

Tab delimited is the default delimiter for that statement but you can change it.

And as someone who regularly works with this amount of data - dump grep, sed and awk and learn Perl. It is way, way faster and is exactly the tool for this kind of job. Oh, and put an index on your search term column.

Why do they even have this stuff?

[Skadet]

Among the list of remedies proposed by the EFF include [...] hav[ing] the FTC bar [AOL] from storing users' search activities "except where necessary... to the rendition of AOL's services or the protection of AOL rights and property." At most, AOL should only be allowed to keep 14 days' worth of data, argues the EFF.

Why do they keep such logs, anyway? If it's to help tailor results better, or to help sell advertising, then why is it correlated with a user ID? My company, for example, saves a keyword search history, but there is no user-identfiable information correlated with it. And it's plenty of information for our needs.

If nothing else, it's a terrible, terrible reminder that no matter where you are, no matter what you're searching for, someone could be watching.

Re:Why do they even have this stuff?

[DerGeist]

More like someone is watching.

This user-search crap is an advertising goldmine. The internet is so vast and intricate that you need a search engine to find just about anything (unless you happen to enjoy posting to random forums in hopes for a response...in a few days or so).

But when you search, it says something about you personally. Just like when you buy things at the grocery store (don't forget to use your Super Shopper Saver Discount Card, Mister 60917492!) searching online indicates what you are interested in and what you're likely to buy in the future. By hopefully pegging your wants, desires, hobbies, interests, tastes and preferences into a conveniently distributable file advertisers hope to beam you laser-targetted ads for crap that you (and only you) will simply HAVE to buy in order to feel complete as a human being.

Without the personal identiciation, they can't hope to learn every intricate detail of your life in order to suck more of your money from your pockets (or packets, as the case may be :-). *ducks*

Re:Why do they even have this stuff?

[pclminion]

Why do they keep such logs, anyway? If it's to help tailor results better, or to help sell advertising, then why is it correlated with a user ID? My company, for example, saves a keyword search history, but there is no user-identfiable information correlated with it. And it's plenty of information for our needs.

First, the search database doesn't list AOL user IDs. It lists "unique IDs" for each user, but they are not correlated to whatever AOL's internal "User ID" is. But to assume that sanitizing the data by changing or completely removing user IDs will make people safe is boneheaded.

Let's start with a grep for social security numbers. I've blipped out the actual numbers themselves, but that's not much help for these poor folks, since anybody can get their hands on the database:

• find robert williams akron oh 44306 XXX-XX-XXXX
• birth certificate for debra ann collins 1-28-59 ss XXX-XX-XXXX
• locate keith ivan thompson born 3 may 64 social security XXX-XX-XXXX last address was XXXXXX colorado
• kristy nicole vega hammond la. social secruity number XXX-XX-XXXX birth date 03 08 81 drivers license number la. XXXXXXXXX address XXXXXXXX.

Moving on, check out this fascinating query:

• all i can say is you looked amazing in that photo. i would love to get achanceto know you. expect a call from me soon. are you looking for a friend or a companian just for future reference

Looks like somebody accidentally copy-pasted a portion of their private communication (email or IM, perhaps) into the search query box and clicked "Submit." Now their private thoughts are available for all to see. You'd be AMAZED at the stuff you'll find in these logs. The idea that by removing usernames/IDs from data is "instant sanitization" is naive and dangerous. There is more than enough information in many of these queries to identify specific individuals and examine EVERYTHING they have searched for in the past 6 months.

(I do question the sanity and intelligence of some of the people who submitted queries like the ones above, but ultimately this is not their fault.)

I've been meaning to make a donation.

[Anonymous Coward]

While I'm demonstrating my support, I thought I'd suggest some of you do the same.

Have you shown your support? EFF

Donate to these people

[MobyDisk]

The EFF is the "stop 1984 from happening" fund. If you read Slashdot, you know why you should be a member.
</soapbox>

Re:Donate to these people

[avalys]

Don't forget the ACLU.

Electronic freedom is nice, but freedom in the real world is all that matters in the end.

Re:Donate to these people

[eipgam]

Some semi-relevant links for UK residents:

http://www.cfoi.org.uk/
http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/
http://www.cyber-rights.org/
http://www.justice.org.uk/

Re:Donate to these people

[Just Some Guy]

And while we're at it, the NRA (for that amendment the ACLU forgot about).

Look on the bright side!

[PrescriptionWarning]

At least they provided a good 20 minutes of entertainment for me this morning :)

www.somethingawful.com/index.php?a=4016

Re:So EFF stands for the free exchange of informat

[Recovering Hater]

No, troll. From their main page : "What is EFF? EFF is a nonprofit group of passionate people -- lawyers, technologists, volunteers, and visionaries -- working to protect your digital rights.

I wonder

[LiquidCoooled]

Even if this *doesn't* get through court, could an AOL customer ask AOL for their export ID number?

Is the ID number we have all grown to know an integral part of every AOL account?
Does AOL even know who user 17556639 actually is or was it generated automatically and then lost in the data export?

Re:Why credit monitoring?

[GoRK]

Why should AOL have to provide free credit monitoring? Did the search information include Social Secuirity Numbers, home addresses, mother's maiden name (and identifiable as such), PINs, or some other sort of data that could be used to affect someone's credit report? If not, then what reason is there to ask for credit monitoring?

Really have you not heard about this? The data absolutely did contain exactly this sort of data.

EFF Can't Do It Alone!!!

[pfz]

They need your help!

Watch EFF attorney Jason Schultz tear the roof off in the new documentary, ALTERNATIVE FREEDOM. Maybe you will learn something or be able to show your friends and then we can all make sure digital rights are always kept in mind...

http://alternativefreedom.org/

Re:So EFF stands for the free exchange of informat

[megaditto]

The Government and the Corporations do not have a Constitutional right to privacy.

Hence all consumer (people) data must be treated as private by default, whereas the Government data must be treated as inherently public.

The EFF opposes the recent drive to turn this principle inside-out.

Re:Why credit monitoring?

[budgenator]

Did the search information include Social Secuirity Numbers, home addresses, mother's maiden name (and identifiable as such), PINs, or some other sort of data that could be used to affect someone's credit report?
YES, many people run their personaly identifiable information through a search engine; don't you think that if google indexed a text file that was a dump of some perloined database on eveilhacker.com you'd want to know about it? For me for a search engine to turn over search queries is serious breach of confidence; I could never use Yahoo, MSN, or AOL for anything beyond trivial searches now, and I only use yahoo for yellowpages skimming at work.

Re:Why credit monitoring?

[Neil Blender]

Heh, yeah. I searched it last night with some crude perl regexes. There were a bunch of full names and SSNs in the same search. One funny thing I kept finding was a search like:

"locate John L. Smith last address 123 Main Street, Houston, Texas social security number 123-45-6789"

Like AOL was some magic person finding machine. I kept thinking Star Trek, "Computer: Locate ..."

Relief doesn't match mistake

[dysk]

Yes, AOL made a mistake by releasing that information. They've admitted to the mistake, apologized, and I doubt anyone will try to do this again.

On the other hand, one needs to recognize that they didn't release the information for the purposes of making money, or defrauding the customers, or anything else. They collected the data in order to help a researcher write an extremely informative paper[pdf] about human behavior as it relates to searches. That researcher decided that other's might benefit from the information, and convinced AOL to make it publically available. It turns out that that was a huge lapse in judgement, but nonetheless, intentions are also important and while criticizing AOL, we should also complement them for their effort to interface with the academic community.

AOL has been punished enough in the press. Given the circumstances I don't think that any legal action is necessary.

Re:Relief doesn't match mistake

[fishbowl]

>AOL has been punished enough in the press. Given the circumstances I don't think that any legal action is necessary.

Others are of the opinion that the people responsible should spend decades in prision, and that the company should pay fines and restitution at the kinds of levels that would reduce them from a multi-billion-dollar-corporation to a startup looking for venture capital.

Somehwere in between that extreme and yours, there will be some appropriate consequences.

Re:Relief doesn't match mistake

[Anonymous Coward]

This is more than a "huge lapse in judgment", it's criminal negligence and legal action should be taken (IANAL). It's hard to imagine a researcher or company could be so collosally brain-damaged as to freely give away this data to the public. I would actually be more understanding if it was stolen. If anything, the data should be available only to qualified researchers, and then only under an NDA that would only permit summarized forms of the data to be published.

There is more than enough information in here for identity theft and blackmail. In less than one day of casual inspection, I've identified a number of individuals, of which a half-dozen or so could be blackmail targets (affairs, sexual fetishes, pedophilia, drug abuse and alcoholism, etc.) The number who could be targets of identity theft is higher.

I don't want certified mail

[dysk]

the complaint asks AOL to notify all users affected by the data disclosure via certified mail

Unless I'm being sued or in immediate legal danger, I don't want to get any certified mail. When I do, I have to interrupt my work day and drive 10 miles over questionable roads to the post office. The fact that some of my searches may have been leaked without my name on them is not a reason to send a certified letter, however an insert in my next bill would be completely reasonable.

The EFF has good intentions, but in this case they are going overboard.

Some weird people in the world, that's for sure

[Anonymous Coward]

For example:

select * from aolsearches where anonid = 3620882;

yields a very strange individual... some brief examples (shortened for brevity... it's MUCH longer than this):

| 3620882 | bank robber hide-outs                       | 2006-03-01 22:22:04 |
| 3620882 | male sissy panty stories                    | 2006-03-01 22:35:41 |
| 3620882 | big bosom mothers                           | 2006-03-01 22:47:58 |
| 3620882 | sissy nightgown training                    | 2006-03-02 11:46:49 |
| 3620882 | special female training of sissy men        | 2006-03-02 17:16:24 |
| 3620882 | tight laced girdles                         | 2006-03-05 12:33:09 |
| 3620882 | baptist church directory                    | 2006-03-07 18:56:13 |
| 3620882 | pink panty discipline                       | 2006-03-07 19:41:53 |
| 3620882 | old curvy women                             | 2006-03-10 12:38:47 |
| 3620882 | independent baptist church directory        | 2006-03-12 11:45:44 |
| 3620882 | westboro baptist church                     | 2006-03-23 13:51:49 |
| 3620882 | baptist college directory                   | 2006-03-25 19:44:22 |
| 3620882 | adult diaper parties                        | 2006-04-04 13:51:30 |
| 3620882 | colorado mining claims for sale             | 2006-04-16 13:00:25 |
| 3620882 | husbands that are sissy                     | 2006-04-28 20:13:11 |
| 3620882 | very large bosoms                           | 2006-05-18 21:38:57 |
| 3620882 | how to make gun silencers                   | 2006-05-20 12:45:00 |
| 3620882 | male maid training                          | 2006-05-30 12:15:49 |

Really, I think of myself as a pretty tolerant person, but this seriously makes me wonder what kind of weird individuals roam this planet.

Your 'real world' doesn't include electronic data?

[geekotourist]

Perhaps you're confused by the name "Electronic Frontier Foundation"?

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider warrantless searches. In your 'real world,' a set of police can only do a few warrantless searches per day- maybe 10 or 20 if they have their door-kick down. In the actual world, a set of searchers hooked into AT&Ts database can do millions of warrantless searches per day. And they don't leave busted doors behind as a clue.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

Re:Why credit monitoring?

[joshier]

Right, as if anyones to know that AOL would do this. Yes, AOL is a complete pile of shit for a company, but this was unexpected. You cannot blaim these people, I feel for each one of them.

Re:Even search terms could be a risk

[Intron]

Google already knows where you live and has a satellite picture of your house. They can even tell which computer behind your NAT is making each search, based on the cookies that they leave on your computer.

Re:So EFF stands for the free exchange of informat

[Coppit]

The Government and the Corporations do not have a Constitutional right to privacy.

Newsflash: neither do citizens. The closest the constitution comes is this:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

So your search history is fair game, as long as its not being used for searches and seizures. I get spam to an address I used for a Western Digital hard drive rebate. My neighbors kids get credit card offers after someone bought a kids magazine in their name. Privacy in the US is a joke compared to the strong laws in some countries (Germany IIRC is a good example).