A Teacher's Aide Was Suspended For Not Revealing Her Facebook Password (FB)

Kimberly Hester, a teacher's aide at Frank Squires Elementary in Cassopolis, Michigan, was fired for not disclosing her Facebook password to her supervisors, reports ZDnet. This began in April 2011 when she posted a photo in jest that may or may not have been in good taste of a coworkers pants around her ankles with the caption "Thinking of you." A parent saw the picture and complained to the school district, which began asking her for the password to her Facebook account. Hester was put on paid administrative leave and eventually suspended, but she opted for unpaid leave and aims to put up a legal fight. "I stand by it," she said in a statement. "I did nothing wrong. And I would not, still to this day, let them in my Facebook. And I don’t think it’s OK for an employer to ask you." This is only the latest development in a series of stories surrounding employers requesting employees' Facebook passwords. Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.Join the conversation about this story »See Also:Ex-Googler Fears Google's Greed, So He Launched A Company To Protect People From ItFacebook Prepares For IPO, Halts Secondary TradingFacebook Preparing For IPO In May

Google Refuses To Unlock Pimp's Phone

Joining other social media companies that are watching as their users’ privacy rights are gradually whittled away, Google is standing up to the growing trend of government attempts to go through third-party social media companies to get to users’ information. Google is reportedly challenging the legality of a search warrant the FBI served on the company earlier this year in an effort to crack the Android phone of Dante Dears, a man who was running a prostitution business on his cell phone. The FBI wants into the phone in order to prove Dears continued to run Pimpin’ Hoes Daily, even after he went to prison for it. When confronted with evidence that he’d violated his parole, he handed the phone over but refused to unlock it. Unable to get into the phone because of its privacy settings, which locked agents out after too many failed password attempts, the agency applied for a subpoena against Google to force it to unlock the thing.   “Privacy Issues Abound” “It is not surprising Google is challenging the FBI’s search warrant,” says Mark Clark, a partner with Traverse Legal in Traverse, Mich. “It’s really both a business and policy decision by Google relative to its users and specifically the Android phone users. Privacy issues abound in the tech age as also demonstrated by the furor over Facebook’s changes to privacy policies.” Both Twitter and Facebook have been faced with different kinds of challenges to their privacy policies: Twitter recently knuckled under and provided a user’s tweets to the Manhattan DA’s office in order to avoid heavy fines, and Facebook has caught all kinds of flack about changes to its privacy policy that shorted users. Now Google is stepping up to the plate – but rather noncommittally. According to a statement Google provided to the blog Ars Technica, “Like all law-abiding companies, we comply with valid legal process. Whenever we receive a request we make sure it meets both the letter and spirit of the law before complying. If we believe a request is overly broad, we will seek to narrow it.” “Although most terms of use policies provide that companies such as Apple, Google and Facebook will not disclose personal or private information absent a court order or subpoena, there is a significant segment of the public which values an effort from companies to take a stand against turning over information to the government simply because the government asks for it,” notes Clark. “Challenging the government’s right, in this case the FBI, demonstrates to the public that Google will take measures to protect private consumer information which Google has apparently decided is good public relations,” he adds.   Impact Could Be Far-Reaching Whether Google will be successful is an open question. Twitter ultimately threw user and Occupy Wall Street protester Malcolm Harris under the bus, and law enforcement seems to be winning the war in the courts over access to Facebook users’ accounts and friends. “Typically it is difficult in general to quash a search warrant in a criminal case,” observes Clark. “Typically, the remedy is for the individual under investigation to argue the warrant was defective after the fact.” But here, a third party is having to challenge law enforcement efforts, and the law concerning third party obligations is changing daily. Get the free Criminal Law Newsletter. Subscribe Today While Clark says the Dears case won’t have much of an impact on the privacy rights of Android users who are not being investigated as part of Pimpin’ Hoes Daily-like operations, “it is possible the court could fashion its opinion to make this a case of more far-reaching impact,” he says. “We need to wait and see.” “Law enforcement is increasingly using Twitter and Facebook posts to identify and track would-be criminals, and so the boundaries of what information is posted online in a ‘private’ account carries with it a legitimate expectation of privacy under the First Amendment will be an emerging area of both First and Fourth Amendment privacy concerns,” Clark concludes. Do you think Google and other third-party social media companies have a responsibility to challenge government attempts to violate their users’ privacy? Share your opinion below. Please follow Law & Order on Twitter and Facebook.Join the conversation about this story »

LIVE: FTC Announces Its Big Deal With Google (GOOG)

Google has agreed to change some of its business practices, as part of a settlement with the FTC. Below, we have the official press release. We're also taking live notes on the announcement. Click here for the latest, or just refresh your page. There are two pieces to the FTC's deal with Google: Patents and Anti-trust. Here's what the FTC is saying about each. LIVE NOTES: Patents: Google has to license essential patents. They are the cornerstone of wireless internet phones can work. Google got a bunch of patents when it bought Motorola. Motorola originally promised to share the patents. Then it changed the game, and it wasn't licensing the patents. Google's "unfair conduct" threatened to block consumer access to goods. Google has to give up injunctions it was pursuing. Search: Google will stop scrapping content of its rivals for use in specialized search results. Google has made legally enforceable and binding commitments to this. Investigated that it took content of rivals and passed off as its own. Allegedly scrapped reviews from Yelp and led users to believe it was its own. When Yelp complained, Google allegedly threatened to ban Yelp from search. If this was true, it was problematic and harmful to competition. Disincents innovation. Why make a site since it would just be stolen? Now, companies like Yelp can opt out of the vertical search, but stay in the general Google search. FTC also investigated if Google limited ability to use tools to advertise on Bing and Google. While most advertisers like "multi-homing" the cost for small businesses wasn't very big. Google's primary reason for changing look and feel of search is to improve search, not kill rivals. Especially when competitors try to game search results to help themselves. As federal courts have ruled, focus of law is protecting competition not competitors. Google can now refocus on its products, but do so while competing fairly. Some think the FTC should have done more... some will think we should have done less ... we really do follow the facts where they lead. We do it with appropriate vigor and appropriate restraint. Taking questions now. Our live webcast crashed, so we can't take notes. The press release: Google Agrees to Change Its Business Practices to Resolve FTC Competition Concerns In the Markets for Devices Like Smart Phones, Games and Tablets, and in Online Search Landmark Agreements Will Give Competitors Access to Standard-Essential Patents; Advertisers Will Get More Flexibility to Use Rival Search Engines Google Inc. has agreed to change some of its business practices to resolve Federal Trade Commission concerns that those practices could stifle competition in the markets for popular devices such as smart phones, tablets and gaming consoles, as well as the market for online search advertising. Under a settlement reached with the FTC, Google will meet its prior commitments to allow competitors access – on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms – to patents on critical standardized technologies needed to make popular devices such as smart phones, laptop and tablet computers, and gaming consoles. In a separate letter of commitment to the Commission, Google has agreed to give online advertisers more flexibility to simultaneously manage ad campaigns on Google’s AdWords platform and on rival ad platforms; and to refrain from misappropriating online content from so-called “vertical” websites that focus on specific categories such as shopping or travel for use in its own vertical offerings. “The changes Google has agreed to make will ensure that consumers continue to reap the benefits of competition in the online marketplace and in the market for innovative wireless devices they enjoy,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “This was an incredibly thorough and careful investigation by the Commission, and the outcome is a strong and enforceable set of agreements.” “We are especially glad to see that Google will live up to its commitments to license its standard-essential patents, which will ensure that companies willing to license these patents can compete in the market for wireless devices,” Leibowitz added. “This decision strengthens the standard-setting process that is at the heart of innovation in today’s technology markets.” Google is a global technology company with more than 32,000 employees and annual revenues of nearly $38 billion. The FTC also conducted an extensive investigation into allegations that Google biased its search results to disadvantage certain vertical websites; and that Google entered into anticompetitive exclusive agreements for the distribution of Google Search on both desktop and in the mobile arena. The agency decided not to take action in connection with these allegations. “The evidence the FTC uncovered through this intensive investigation prompted us to require significant changes in Google’s business practices. However, regarding the specific allegations that the company biased its search results to hurt competition, the evidence collected to date did not justify legal action by the Commission,” said Beth Wilkinson, outside counsel to the Commission. “Undoubtedly, Google took aggressive actions to gain advantage over rival search providers. However, the FTC’s mission is to protect competition, and not individual competitors. The evidence did not demonstrate that Google’s actions in this area stifled competition in violation of U.S. law.” In response to the agency’s concerns about several of its business practices, Google has agreed to take the following steps: Google will not seek injunctions to block rivals from using patents essential to key technologies In 2012, Google paid about $12.5 billion to acquire Motorola Mobility (MMI), including MMI’s patent portfolio of over 24,000 patents and patent applications. These patents have been a significant source of revenue for at least a decade, and hundreds of MMI’s patents are essential to industry standards used to provide wireless connectivity and for internet-related technologies. These standards are essential for smartphones, tablets, gaming systems, operating systems, and the increasing number of devices offering wireless connectivity or high definition video. Development and use of these types of standards is a cornerstone for many high-tech markets, and encourages innovation and investment in high-tech products, according to the FTC’s complaint. By agreeing to standards, companies can ensure that the numerous components of a device or a technology network can work together seamlessly, often called “interoperability.” Setting a standard, however, can have the effect of giving market power to the owner of a patent that is deemed essential to the standard, according to the agency. That patent – even if it is only on a small component of a much larger and more complex device – can be used to “hold up” a licensee for an excessive royalty. To avoid this problem, technology companies involved in setting a standard commit to license standard-essential patents on “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” terms – known as FRAND terms. The Commission’s complaint alleges that Google reneged on its FRAND commitments and pursued – or threatened to pursue – injunctions against companies that need to use MMI’s standard-essential patents in their devices and were willing to license them on FRAND terms. Specifically the company pursued injunctions in federal district court and at the United States International Trade Commission (“ITC”) to block competing technology companies from using MMI standard-essential patents. The FTC alleged that this type of patent hold-up is what the standard setting organizations sought to prevent by instituting FRAND licensing requirements. According to the FTC, if left unchecked, this type of patent hold-up can lead to higher prices, as companies may pay higher royalties for the use of Google’s patents because of the threat of an injunction, and then pass those higher prices on to consumers. This may cause companies in technology industries to abandon the standard-setting process and limit or forgo investment in new technologies, according to the agency. To remedy this concern, Google has agreed to a Consent Order that prohibits it from seeking injunctions against a willing licensee, either in federal court or at the ITC, to block the use of any standard-essential patents that the company has previously committed to license on FRAND terms. Google will remove restrictions hampering advertisers’ management of their ad campaigns across competing ad platforms Under a separate commitment, Google has agreed to remove restrictions on the use of its online search advertising platform, AdWords, that may make it more difficult for advertisers to coordinate online advertising campaigns across multiple platforms. Advertisers who wish to use a search advertising platform spend considerable time, effort, and resources preparing extensive bids, including keywords, price information, and targeting information. Once an advertiser has entered the information necessary to create a search advertising campaign, the advertising platform sends critical data back to the advertisers that they need to evaluate the effectiveness of, and to further manage, their campaign. Advertising platforms use application programming interfaces, known as APIs, to give advertisers direct access to these advertising platforms so they can develop their own software programs to automatically manage and optimize their advertising campaigns. Some FTC Commissioners were concerned that Google’s contractual conditions governing the use of its API made it more difficult for an advertiser to simultaneously manage a campaign on AdWords and on competing ad platforms, and that these restrictions might impair competition in search advertising. Google will give websites the ability to “opt out” of display on Google vertical properties Under the same commitment, Google also has promised to provide all websites the option to keep their content out of Google’s vertical search offerings, while still having them appear in Google’s general, or “organic,” web search results. The FTC investigated allegations that Google misappropriated content, such as user reviews and star ratings, from competing websites in order to improve its own vertical offerings, such as Google Local and Google Shopping. Some FTC Commissioners were concerned that this conduct might chill firms’ incentives to innovate on the Internet. FTC’s investigation into allegations of search bias The FTC conducted an extensive investigation into allegations that Google had manipulated its search algorithms to harm vertical websites and unfairly promote its own competing vertical properties, a practice commonly known as “search bias.” In particular, the FTC evaluated Google’s introduction of “Universal Search” – a product that prominently displays targeted Google properties in response to specific categories of searches, such as shopping and local – to determine whether Google used that product to reduce or eliminate a nascent competitive threat. Similarly, the investigation focused on the allegation that Google altered its search algorithms to demote certain vertical websites in an effort to reduce or eliminate a nascent competitive threat. According to the Commission statement, however, the FTC concluded that the introduction of Universal Search, as well as additional changes made to Google’s search algorithms – even those that may have had the effect of harming individual competitors – could be plausibly justified as innovations that improved Google’s product and the experience of its users. It therefore has chosen to close the investigation. The Commission would like to acknowledge the close cooperation in this matter with the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition, and with the state Attorneys General of Texas, New York, Ohio, California, and Oklahoma. The Commission vote to accept the consent agreement package containing the proposed consent order relating to standard-essential patents (SEPs) for public comment was 4-1, with Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen voting no. The vote to issue the Commission statement in the SEP matter was 3-0-2, with Commissioners Rosch and Ohlhausen abstaining. Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch issued a separate statement regarding the SEP matter; Commissioner Ohlhausen issued a dissenting statement regarding the SEP matter. The Commission vote to close the investigation related to Google’s search-related practices was 5-0. The vote to issue the Commission statement relating to the search investigationwas 4-0-1, with Commissioner Rosch abstaining. Commissioner Rosch issued a statement concurring and dissenting with regard to the search investigationregarding the search investigation; and Commissioner Ohlhausen issued a concurring statement regarding the search investigation. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through February 4, 2013, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments in electronic form should be submitted using the following Web link: https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/motorolagoogleconsent and following the instructions on the web-based form. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions. Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.Join the conversation about this story »

Facebook invites privacy feedback after policy updates

Facebook has re-opened feedback for its contentious Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, asking users who expressed a particular interest in social network privacy for their opinions on the site. The site sent messages to more than 2,000 registered members – each of whom who have previously “Liked” the Facebook Site Governance Page - notifying them that they Read The Full Story

Password Privacy bill killed in House

An attempt to make employers demanding access to Facebook passwords illegal has been killed off by the US House of Representatives, with arguments between political parties seeing the privacy amendment voted off the table. Democratic Congressman Ed Perlmutter had suggested attaching an amendment [pdf link] to H.R. 3309, the Federal Communications Commission Process Reform Act of 2012, which would Read The Full Story

Facebook: No “immediate plans” for password legal action

Facebook may have updated its policies to stop employers demanding user’s passwords for the social network, but the company says it has “no current plans” to follow through on the legal action it originally threatened. The change to the Facebook Statement of Rights and Responsibilities followed widespread reports earlier this month that some companies were requesting access Read The Full Story

LastPass hacked, users warned to change master passwords

LastPass is a service for users that is free and adds a browser extension that is supposed to remember all the passwords a user has for various passwords on websites and other things online. The LastPass company has announced that the service was apparently hacked by outside sources and that an unspecified amount of data was transferred away from the servers.

According to the company, the amount of data transferred was enough that it could contain “the server salt and their salted password hashes.” Salted apparently means the plaintext encrypted passwords that still need to be unencrypted using brute force methods were taken. The company feels that those that have non-dictionary based passwords will have no issues. LastPass is recommending that all users change their master passwords. Changing those master passwords has become an issue for some people though according to the comments on the official LastPass blog posting about the hack. People are having trouble getting LastPass to prompt them to enter a new password or send them the link to get a new password via email. To make matters worse if they used LastPass to manage their email password, they are truly out of luck. LastPass has also added another layer of security to thwart the use of any stolen information; users have to access the service from an IP that they have used before. The rub here is if you happen to be on an ISP with dynamic IP address and the IP changes, no joy for the user. [via TheNextWeb] Relevant Entries on SlashGearPlayStation Network may have been hackedView-Master hacked to hide dual LCDs from cheap keychain framesKeep track of your passwords with just a swipe of your fingerMicrosoft’s Zune Hacked for USB StorageMix up tracks in style with the Baby Grand Master

Your Evernote Password Has Been Hacked

Evernote, the popular note-taking app on mobile devices and computers, has been hacked, forcing the company to reset all user passwords. In a blog post, Evernote said the hackers did not take any private user data or payment information. The system-wide password reset is just a precaution. Here's Evernote's explanation for what happened: Evernote's Operations & Security team has discovered and blocked suspicious activity on the Evernote network that appears to have been a coordinated attempt to access secure areas of the Evernote Service. ... In our security investigation, we have found no evidence that any of the content you store in Evernote was accessed, changed or lost. We also have no evidence that any payment information for Evernote Premium or Evernote Business customers was accessed. The investigation has shown, however, that the individual(s) responsible were able to gain access to Evernote user information, which includes usernames, email addresses associated with Evernote accounts and encrypted passwords. Even though this information was accessed, the passwords stored by Evernote are protected by one-way encryption. All Evernote users will be prompted to change their password next time they try to log in. The company updated its mobile apps today to make changing your password easier. The Evernote hacking is the latest in a series of hacks of popular tech companies, web services, and apps. All kinds of companies from Facebook to Apple have experienced some form of hacking in recent weeks. Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.Join the conversation about this story »

BIS 3.2 rolled out to North American BlackBerry users

Having seen BIS 3.2 released to APAC and EMEA users already, many folks in North America should now be waking up to find that their BlackBerry Internet Services has now been updated as well. Reports from all major carriers indicate that the update went as planned and the new options are now available. Those options include:

Google Calendar Sync - The option to sync your Gmail calendar with your BlackBerry calendar Automatic Login Enhancement - Username and Password in order to access the BlackBerry Internet Service no longer required when on your BlackBerry Show and Hide Password Option - Subscribers can choose to show or hide the passwords for all email addresses that need to be validated by clicking the Show password or Hide password options. New Password Criteria - Newly created passwords for BlackBerry Internet Service accounts and BlackBerry email addresses must meet new criteria.

Must include 8 to 16 characters

Must include at least one letter and one number

Cannot include the word "password"

Cannot include the user name of the BlackBerry Internet Service account or BlackBerry email address that the password is associated with

Some long awaited additions there. Have at it folks and let us know how the calendar sync is working out for you all should you opt to use it. Word is it works with Google Apps as well which is a plus. CrackBerry.com's feed sponsored by ShopCrackBerry.com. BIS 3.2 rolled out to North American BlackBerry users

Blizzard suffers security breach, encrypted passwords and authenticator data compromised

According to a recent Blizzard security update, now might be a good time cook up a new password. Blizzard's security team found that its internal network has been illegally accessed, and answers to personal security questions, authenticator data and cryptographically scrambled Battle.net passwords have found their way into the perpetrator's hands. The team is confident, however, that the compromised data isn't enough to give the attacker access to user accounts, and says that there is no evidence to suggest financial data (credit cards, billing addresses and customer names) were accessed. Blizzard President Mike Morhaine recommends that users update their passwords all the same, and we couldn't agree more. Check out his official statement at the source link below and get that Diablo III account locked down.Filed under: InternetBlizzard suffers security breach, encrypted passwords and authenticator data compromised originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 09 Aug 2012 19:48:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.Permalink Massively (Joystiq)  |  Blizzard  | Email this | Comments