Wednesday, December 2, 2009

PACER


Federal law practitioners know that to view a document on PACER (federal electronic filing) costs $0.08 per page ... so how much does the Dept. of Justice spend in PACER fees a year?

Answer: $4,000,000.00. Wow.

And the IRS? $950,000.00 in 2008. Double-wow.

And how much does PACER bring in per year? $50,000,000.00 in 2006 ... triple-wow.


Monday, November 23, 2009

When Your Boss Wants Your DNA


Outstanding privacy story by NPR this morning on the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) that went into effect over the weekend.

GINA (background here) prohibits health insurers and employers from using your genetic information against you. It went into effect on November 21, and prevents health insurers from collecting genetic information to make decisions about the insurance people get or how much it costs.

More from the NPR story (listen to it here):

It took over a decade to get GINA through Congress. Since then, genetic medicine has gone from an imagined frontier to scientific reality.

"Genetic medicine is expanding dramatically. So, for example, there are genetic tests available that can give you an idea of your increased likelihood of developing cancer. And once you have that information, you can do things to minimize your risk. You can pursue more preventive or early detection kind of care and really increase the chances that the cancer won't affect you."

For some medicines, there is testing to see whether they'll even work for an individual, whether the medication will cause side effects and what dose is the most effective.

But until now, Baruch says, people passed up genetic testing that could have helped them. They kept information hidden, even from their own doctors, because they had reason to fear that genetic information would be used against them. "Alleviating the fear was one of the primary purposes of GINA, so that we would all benefit from these advances in genetic medicine, rather than having to hide from them," Baruch says.

Now, she says, patients need to be educated about these benefits, and employers have to learn that they can't gather genetic information or family history of their workers.

JHW: The idea that employers could use your genetic code against you is ghastly. What if you are 50% more likely to develop cancer after 40 - should companies be allowed to refuse hiring you based solely on your genetic code?

Friday, November 20, 2009

Post Office to block "Dear Santa" letters


The Federal Sentencing and Policy Blog had an interesting article (from USA Today, actually) on the U.S. Post Office's recent decision to stop forwarding "Dear Santa," letters by children to North Pole, Alaska. The concern is that children frequently include their personal information (names, addresses, pictures) in such letters that, theoretically, could fall into the wrong hands.

Here is the article:

The U.S. Postal Service, citing security and privacy concerns of children, will no longer forward "Dear Santa" letters to the Alaska town of North Pole, putting in jeopardy the town's 55-year-old volunteer letter-answering effort by the town. The concern is that names, addresses and other private information about small children could get into the wrong hands.


Postal Service officials note that a postal worker last year in Maryland recognized a volunteer in the agency's Operation Santa program as a registered sex offender, the Associated Press reports. The Postal Service now prohibits volunteers in such programs to have access to children's last names and addresses.


Mayor Doug Isaacson says the Postal Service is "running roughshod" over the city of North Pole, whose identity is tied to Christmas, the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner reports. "What grinch would conceive of something so sinister?" Isaacson tells the paper. He says businesses and civic organizations in the town of 2,200 gear up for the program every year "when we're able to really demonstrate the spirit of Christmas."

JHW: Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Patriot Act Changes

Proposed Patriot Act changes from the House and Senate (pdf).

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Men indicted for 2008 WorldPay Hack

Back in February 2009, I blogged about a group of hackers that orchestrated one of the most sophisticated bank card hacks of all time. It was a $9 million hack where, for only several minutes, the withdrawal limit for hundreds of ATM cards was temporarily removed. During those couple minutes, a small army of "foot soldiers" took to the streets and withdrew cash, cash, and more cash. Then, just as suddenly as the hack began, it stopped. A flash-mob hack, if you will, and the blogosphere was stunned.


It seems, however, that the international law enforcement community worked together to find out the mastermind(s) of the hack. Earlier this week, four men of eastern European decent were indicted in Northern District of Georiga.

Here is a description of the brain-trust as posted by Cybercrime and Doing Time:

SERGEI TŠURIKOV, 25, of Tallinn, Estonia performed reconnaissance and found a path of entry into the RBS WOrldPay computer network. Using unnamed hackers, they found a successful path of vulnerability into the network. TŠURIKOV then introduced these hackers to VIKTOR PLESHCHUK, 28, of St. Petersburg, Russia who was the one to actually mastermind the hack, supported by OLEG COVELIN, 28, of Chişinău, Moldova, and an unknown hacker referred to in the indictment as "HACKER 3". TŠURIKOV also managed an existing ring of "cashiers" - criminals who brazenly take the risk of withdrawing money using counterfeit ATM cards, and then dutifully wire part of their proceeds back to the smarter criminals who don't take such risks themselves.

Pic: Wired's Threat Level

Friday, November 6, 2009

Outrage! In Maricopa County

Talk about privacy, secrecy, and surveillance! This video shows government intrusion into the private life of a citizen in its most raw form.

The set-up: Criminal defense lawyer is arguing before a judge. The courtroom deputies sneak up behind her back and swipe - steal! - a document from her personal file concerning this defendant.

At 1:00 -- you can see the blond deputy reading the private file.
At 1:34 -- you can clearly see the blond deputy reach into the file and take out a document.
At 1:49 -- larger deputy walks away w/ the file
At 2:02 to 2:10 -- the theft is revealed in open court and you can see the blond deputy clearly shift his hands in anxiety over being caught -- what's called "pacifying behavior" in the field of body language interpretation.



Hat tip: SDFLA Blog.

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Metadata = public record, says Arizona Supreme Court


The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that metadata is considered part of the public record. The case stems from a police officer who alleges that his supervisors backdated a document concerning his performance. The officer had sued the city for employment discrimination, and sought the metadata to prove his allegation that his employment record had indeed been doctored.

The city argued that metadatea was not part of the public record.

Metadata is data about a record. For example, a document containing various employee complaints is data. Information about when the document was created, however, is metadata. In the Arizona case, the metadata would have revealed whether, in fact, the employee review document had been accessed after the performance review, and when.

The Arizona Supreme Court held that if a record is help to be public, including in an electronic format, the embedded metadata is likewise a public record.

The Washington State Supreme Court is set to hear a similar case.

pic: Yourwallpaper.com