Slashdot Mirror


Connecticut Governor Seeks to Protect Personal Data Online

Technical Writing Geek alerts us to a report that Connecticut governor Jodi Rell has begun to develop legislation to create an "opt-out" registry to prevent the distribution of personal information on the internet. The registry would be analogous to the "Do Not Call" list. This comes after Rell received many complaints about the availability of personal data from directory assistance sites such as WhitePages and 411.com. While Rell understands that the "sites are breaking no law by gathering and disseminating this information," the legislation will add to the work she has done to re-evaluate the disposition of private data. Where do we draw the line between free speech and privacy in the information age? From the Journal Inquirer: "'Privacy concerns are constantly evolving,' Rell said. 'We must not only keep up with them but do our best to stay ahead of the curve.' Rell said she will ask state agencies to review private information about residents that the state collects, manages, and distributes."

13 of 59 comments (clear)

  1. Publish personal details of all company board by freedom_india · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since "now law is broken" by companies for publishing out private information, we can plead the same by publishing the company's members information online.
    Every single stockholder, boardmember, CEO, lawyer, employee contact information (including public and private numbers and addresses) should be published online 411.com by us.
    Once the mighty CEOs and CFOs see their private and unlisted numbers plus email IDs online, am sure the congress and senate would go overnight to enact a law preventing that from happening.

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    1. Re:Publish personal details of all company board by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ummm.. if you can get it then how is it private information? Assuming, of course, that you are a member of the public and haven't broken any laws to obtain the information. That would seem to be the definition of public knowledge.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:Publish personal details of all company board by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Call it "intended to be private".

      Just because you can social engineer it out of people doesn't mean it was intended to be known.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    3. Re:Publish personal details of all company board by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It is not hard to find any of the information that you are asking about. Any public corporation will have SEC data about all of its officers.

      Take 411.com. Scroll to the bottom and see that it is run by Whitepages.com, Inc. They have an "about us" page with a leadership section. On that page are all the names you need to get started. Let's start with the top: Alex Algard, Founder and CEO. Searching for him on 411.com yields:

      Algard, Alexander & Susie K
      1005 5th Ave W
      Seattle, WA 98119-3613

      3 blocks from their main offices... so, yeah, that's him. Hard, huh?

      CEOs not only have less privacy than us already, they have more people looking for them.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:Publish personal details of all company board by Sandbags · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why should my taxes be of public(ally accessibly) record? Sure, there needs to be a back tracable record for auditing purposes, tax income to SSN and what not, but why should an individual outside of a government or 3rd party auditing firm have any access to that information? The general public needs to know the total taxes collected, and how that divides up by taxe type, code, and region, but not down the the detail of which individual paid (or owes) how much. This information has no interest or value on an individual to individual basis except to be abused by marketers to target me for products or services. If I offer this information by opting into an advertising matrix then they can have it. If I have no interest in credit cards I don't want to get 8 mailers a week offering me one. This is called selective initiated target advertising, and if people comply and list themselves for specific products then companies can save billions in falsly targeted mailings and the information I want to keep private can remain private.

      The government needs to know how much to bill me for taxes, and wether or not i have paid it, sure. I can see where companies that issue credit or loans need to be aware of your credit rating and wether or not you have outstanding tax or other collections against you, but that information should be kept between you, the government, and the company you authorized to use that information for a specific purpose, it should not be out there for everyone to peruse! They shuold not be able to simply look that stuff up at will, but shuold be required, like when switching phone companies, to get 3rd party real time authorization.

      If i want to switch from my local phone company's long distance plan to AT&T, I not only have to get on the line with AT&T, but they have to get a 3rd party on the line to confirm 1) i am who I say I am and 2) to confirm I authorized the change. Only then can AT&T file the paperwork to switch me. Some company offering me credit should have to do the same: 1) contact me in some way, or get me to contact them, 2) get my approval, with a 3rd party firm on the line at the same time to access my credit detail history, then and only then 3) access my detailed credit report. Prior to this point, all they should be able to get is my beacon score, debt to income ratio, and last year's income figures, and only if they already have my name and address and if I have not opted out of allowing them that information. They should have no knowledge of any collections against me, loan balances, number of credit cards, or anything else. If they want to offer me services, all they need is to know if I qualify in general. If I want their services, then can perform a full qualification, but only with 3rd party approval. They should not be given information outside of what qualifies or declines me (the fact that I have 6 credit cards with a total balance of $2000, $300 available is important, and wether or not I'm making payments on time, but who those cards are with is irrelevent) How much I PAID for my house has no bearing on what I'm selling it for, only what it's appraised for (to a potential buyer) and my loan balance (to another lender) has any bearing there. Maybe how long I've owned it... Even that information should be by individual request only and not published in some freely available list. Consumers should not be able to get a detailed list of what each house on my street sold for and when, but should only be able to get estimates or averages, or price ranges in 25, 50, 100, or 250K (based on total price). For example, if I bought my house for 182K, all anyone should be able to know is in 2006 when that happened, i paid between 150K and 200K for it, they should not see my exact closing price.

      If every company offering or merketing a service, loan, credit, or porduct had to get my permission before accessing my personal information, and confirm that permission with a 3rd party auditing firm, then identity theft would be MUCH harder to pull off.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
  2. Opt-out? Meh. by Xenkar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wish just once that one of these politicians would have the balls to make it opt-in, with written consent required and none of that "hidden deep within a contract" crud. Perhaps requiring a public notary to stamp it too might be beneficial.

    I know for sure that I'd sleep well if these opt-out lowlifes lost their jobs.

  3. clueless by Power_Pentode · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Once that opt-out list is complete, how much do you think spammers and scammers will pay for it? Oh, wait -- you're going to give access to anyone running a directory or investigative website? What could possibly go wrong?

  4. Hmmmm by edittard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The registry would be analogous to the "Do Not Call" list.
    In the sense that it, too, will be a totally ineffective waste of time?
    --
    At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
  5. where is the line by Grampaw+Willie · · Score: 3, Insightful
    the article asks

    where do we draw the line between privacy and free speech?


    generally, if you own the press you can print what you want,~~

    with a few caveats, however, and as these are well established there is no need for discussion

    1. you should not publish slander

    2. you should not infringe other folk's copyrights

    3. you should not involve in a conspiracy to commit crime

    Is my personal information copyright protected? I see no reason why it shouldn't be and in a day and age where we have more hackers than Hollywood had stage robbers there are good reasons why we should protect everyone's personal data by law.
  6. Gosh, we'd be happy if... by jpellino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...she'd stop the laptops with state taxpayer financial data from being plucked from employee cars. (They claim they need all the data resident on every laptop whose operator is working on a given datatset.) Here in CT that's the bigger issue for her and the lege, To this more recent one, I can recall people being horrified years ago that we could find their phone listing in whitepages, their address on mapquest and an aerial photo on terraserver. Of course all of this was public information, now it's just easier for the "datarazzi" to get it in bulk. We've been on the DNC list and reg'd with DMA's pref service for years, and they still get thru. National opt-in with some teeth in it would be nice.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  7. Interesting by Bootarn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In Sweden we have laws against publishing personal information of citizens. To publish even the equivalent of the social security number you must have the consent of the citizen in question. Unfortunately within license agreements the paragraph covering consent of publishing of personal information is buried deep within the text.

  8. What about the data of 600 students in CT by tenaciousdRules · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I worked at the CT Department of Education, I lobbyed desperately for a centralized, secure data repository for student data. The analysts would constantly send student lists on disks via snail(or by a "secure" zip file), print paper lists of student data and take them offsite, and even put copies of this data on their personal computers to take home. I was passionate about keeping the demographic data of Connecticuts students secure and grew frustrated with the roadblocks.
    We even got a Federal Grant with Governor Rell's help to contract out the project (we in no way had the resources to build it). As far as I can tell, the data are still in a SQL 2005 database, replicated multiple times, with access given to multiple undocumented users.
    No business rules are in place other than the 1 overworked DBA there granting "read only" to anyone who requests it. There is a team there working very hard to make the data secure, but they are small and unsupported. Perhaps Madam Rell's efforts would be better directed at her own IT infrastructure...

    --
    --Always, I mean never..., No I mean always check your references.--
    1. Re:What about the data of 600 students in CT by tenaciousdRules · · Score: 2, Informative

      Correction: 600,000 students. CT is small, just not that small....

      --
      --Always, I mean never..., No I mean always check your references.--