WPF Moderating Biometrics & Privacy Frameworks Panel for the Biometric Institute Spring Meeting

Pam Dixon, WPF ED, will be moderating a panel on biometrics and data and privacy protection frameworks at the spring meeting of the Biometrics Institute Tuesday, March 26 at 11:50 am. The focus will be an expert discussion of Federal and state privacy and biometric legislation in the US, including new developments and approaches to principles in biometrics.

Location:

Mary Gates Learning Center, 701 North Fairfax Road, Alexandria, VA 22314

Moderator: Pam Dixon, Executive Director WPF
Debra Bernard, Partner Perkins Coie LLP
Joseph Jerome, Policy Counsel, Privacy and Data Project CDT
Andrew Kingman, Senior Managing Attorney DLA Piper

The meeting will be held at the Mary Gates Learning Center, 701 North Fairfax Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

11:50 AM Discussion: Federal and State biometric legislation

This panel will feature a conversation about federal biometric regulation, a potential federal privacy bill, BIPA in Illinois, and what the landscape looks like in the next 24 months.

Moderator: Pam Dixon, Executive Director, World Privacy Forum

Debra Bernard, Partner, Perkins Coie LLP
Joseph Jerome, Policy Counsel, Privacy & Data Project, Center for Democracy & Technology
Andrew Kingman, Senior Managing Attorney, DLA Piper

Posted March 24, 2019 in

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.