Privacy Act of 1974

Oct 30 2013

Data Brokers and the Federal Government: A New Front in the Battle for Privacy Opens | Discussion and Analysis of the OMB Do Not Pay Guidance

The best starting point for understanding the OMB Do Not Pay memo is with the legal framework behind the Do Not Pay Initiative. The Initiative derives from a combination of little-noticed executive orders and updates to existing laws.

In 2009, Executive Order 13520, Reducing Improper Payments, [29] directed agencies to identify “ways in which information sharing may improve eligibility verification and pre-payment scrutiny.” This was the start of the current Do Not Pay Initiative.

Oct 30 2013

Data Brokers and the Federal Government: A New Front in the Battle for Privacy Opens | Executive Summary

You are reading the Executive Summary of Data Brokers and the Federal Government: A New Front in the Battle for Privacy Opens Report Links: Report Home & Executive Summary Download the full report (PDF) Jump to other sections of the report: Executive Summary | I. Introduction | II. Discussion | III. Recommendations | IV. Conclusion | Appendices Executive Summary The US federal government

Oct 30 2013

Data Brokers and the Federal Government: A New Front in the Battle for Privacy Opens | All Appendices

You are reading Appendices A, B, and C of Data Brokers and the Federal Government: A New Front in the Battle for Privacy Opens Report Links: Report Home & Executive Summary Download the full report (PDF) Jump to other sections of the report: Executive Summary | I.Introduction | II. Discussion | III. Recommendations | IV. Conclusion | Appendices Appendix A: Chronology of the

Apr 23 2013

Public Comments: April 2013 – FAA must clarify and enhance drone privacy practices

Commercial drone privacy – In comments filed with the FAA, the World Privacy Forum urged the agency to establish a robust privacy committee to focus on drone privacy and to clarify the applicability of the Privacy Act of 1974 to UAS test site operators. WPF also requested the FAA conduct mandatory Privacy Impact Assessments and provide a FIPS-compliant privacy notice. ”We have offered our comments to the FAA with the acknowledgement that everyone has much to learn in the area of commercial drone privacy. Our suggestions to the FAA seek to increase general knowledge about drones and their effect on privacy,” said Pam Dixon.

Aug 02 2010

Public Comments: August 2010 – WPF files comments on deeply flawed SEC plan

The World Privacy Forum filed comments today criticizing the SEC proposed regulations that would release an unprecedented amount of financial details about individual borrowers through the EDGAR database. The WPF was joined by other privacy, consumer, and human rights organizations in its comments, which focused on the privacy issues with the proposed regulations. Pam Dixon, executive director of the WPF, stated in the comments that the SEC’s new regulations would “Place on the public record and online the largest amount of personal financial information about borrowers ever disclosed, including information never before made public.” The comments also note that the SEC’s plan greatly increases the risk of identity theft for individual borrowers whose information will be released publicly.

New Report: Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools

We are pleased to announce the publication of a new WPF report, “Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools.” This report sets out a definition of AI governance tools, documents why and how these tools are critically important for trustworthy AI, and where these tools are around the world. The report also documents problems in some AI governance tools themselves, and suggests pathways to improve AI governance tools and create an evaluative environment to measure their effectiveness. AI systems should not be deployed without simultaneously evaluating the potential adverse impacts of such systems and mitigating their risks, and most of the world agrees about the need to take precautions against the threats posed. The specific tools and techniques that exist to evaluate and measure AI systems for their inclusiveness, fairness, explainability, privacy, safety and other trustworthiness issues — called in the report collectively AI governance tools – can improve such issues. While some AI governance tools provide reassurance to the public and to regulators, the tools too often lack meaningful oversight and quality assessments. Incomplete or ineffective AI governance tools can create a false sense of confidence, cause unintended problems, and generally undermine the promise of AI systems. The report contains rich background details, use cases, potential solutions to the problems discussed in the report, and a global index of AI Governance Tools.
National IDs Around the World — Interactive map

About this Data Visualization: This interactive map displays the presence...
Report: From the Filing Cabinet to the Cloud: Updating the Privacy Act of 1974

This comprehensive report and proposed bill text is focused on the Privacy Act of 1974, an important and early Federal privacy law that applies to the government sector and some contractors. The Privacy Act was written for the 1970s information era -- an era that was characterized by the use of mainframe computers and filing cabinets. Today's digital information era looks much different than the '70s: smart phones are smarter than the old mainframes, and documents are now routinely digitized and stored and perhaps even analyzed in the cloud, among many other changes. The report focuses on why the Privacy Act needs an update that will bring it into this century, and how that could look and work. This work was written by Robert Gellman, and informed by a two-year multi-stakeholder process.