#data requests

Google has begun charging law enforcement agencies in US for legal demands seeking user data- Technology News, Firstpost

[ad_1]

The New York TimesJan 27, 2020 10:25:36 IST

Facing an increasing number of requests for its users’ information, Google began charging law enforcement and other government agencies this month for legal demands seeking data such as emails, location-tracking information and search queries.

Google’s fees range from $45 for a subpoena and $60 for a wiretap to $245 for a search warrant,…

Microsoft sues US over secret data requests [Sarah McBride – Reuters]

Secrecy should be “the exception, not the rule.”, Microsoft says.

This is the Part-3 of 'Automating the Evaluation in connection with Web Bull ring User Experience: Collecting Qualitative\Quantitative UX. This position will introduce and parlay upon which the new approach for collection the user experience data as things go mentioned at the end of primitive article.<\p>

A New Ring in to Gathering User Experience Data<\p>

Keeping in mind the constraints involving the string choir in connection with users you plan so that study and the kind of random data subconscious self need to collect, the bordering challenge is selecting the right methodology<\p>

The desire as representing large, evenhanded, exponent samples suggests using automated methods such after this fashion log animal charge analysis. However, the need for music-flowing, contextually sensitive session mention suggests usability lab testing. Thence, there is a dilemma of part in front of quality: log files generate a larger product of rectangular data, whereas usability labs generate much richer data. Furthermore, specific of these methods can prolongate serious flaws incoming its area of concentration when used inappropriately or inconsistently by different researchers. The solution is vestibule the center where the bipartisan ends respecting the spectrum mold.<\p>

Again data inventory methods can help usability researchers capture large amounts of enjoyer experience data while maintaining qualitative richness. These solutions combine the best speaking of brace approaches with disputable sacrifices. The result is a more athletic and standardized process to conduct positive, reliable, actionable usability inquiry.<\p>

Dominant WebEffective„ was developed to automate usability data collection and to strike the right balance between flock of data collected and the quality with respect to that relevant fact. As with further Keynote performance management solutions, WebEffective is deployed after this fashion a service using a network of servers fixed between actual site visitors and Web site servers. in behalf of particularization. In harmony with redirecting visitors to your Web site through Keynote servers, WebEffective can maintain its position unobtrusively monitoring and recording user interaction. WebEffective is able to see and take in all HTML content downloaded in order to the users' computer as satisfactorily as all the upstream publicity requests sent to the Organism server. WebEffective then reconstructs the muniments streams into actual visitor sessions<\p>

Donnee used in the Article: WebEffective is able to settle and come by all HTML ungrudging downloaded to the users' computer as well well as acme the upstream data requests sent to the Ensnarement server.<\p>

From the start, my campaign has pledged to make the office of Attorney General more transparent than ever, by releasing all public data by default instead of only releasing public data after individuals request it via the Data Practices Act. To highlight the need for such a policy, our campaign filed a number of Data Practices Act requests with various government entities in an attempt to obtain public information that we believe should have been published prior to our asking for it, due to the fact that the information is in the public interest.

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives. A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy or perhaps both” - James Madison

In a constitutional democratic republic such as ours, it is absolutely essential that the general public be aware of what the government is doing. As the Declaration of Independence points out, in order to secure our unalienable Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. If we, the governed, do not know what our government is doing, then we have no ability to consent to their actions.

The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act affords all of us a great deal of power to inspect data created by government employees and entities. In fact, it is used quite often to allow individuals and organizations the ability to gain insight into what our government is doing. Citizens can make these requests and take them to the press or their elected government officials to bring about change.

It shouldn't be the duty of the citizen to publish the data they obtain via a data practices request. This is why I believe it is best to publish all public data upfront, so that all citizens and organizations can use the information how they see fit, without having to enter the bureaucratic realm just to participate fully in politics. We made several requests and are releasing them here in the public interest.

Police militarization: In response to the actions of the St. Louis County Police in Ferguson, Missouri, we first released our data about police militarization in an earlier post titled, “Police Militarization II: Civil Rights Crisis.” We independently obtained this data and released it the same day that the Star Tribune released results from a similar request. We followed up on the request in an attempt to obtain the justifications given by the local police departments when applying for Pentagon war gear.

We discovered that the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office is the only law enforcement agency that the Minnesota 1122 program has verified to receive war gear at a reduced cost. However, the justifications submitted to the Minnesota Law Enforcement Support Office (LESO) contain information that relates to the assessment of threat and vulnerability in a specific jurisdiction and therefore are classified as security information as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 13.37, subdivision 1 (a). Therefore, the data is not public. Police departments in other states have used these assessments to claim annual pumpkin festivals require armored vehicles, so we believe keeping this kind of information secret is wrong.

Opaque Board of Pardons: Because the Attorney General sits on the Board of Pardons, we decided to do a data request to the Board to see how Lori Swanson has voted these past four years. We were quite alarmed to discover that no minutes are created or exist for these meetings. Being one of three officials who decides whether or not a person is pardoned is a major responsibility and not having the votes from this panel made public is poor public policy.

If I am elected Attorney General, I will take the minutes for the Board of Pardons myself and will release them to the public immediately on the Attorney General's website. Ghostwriting flawed legislation: While conducting research into the Attorney General's role in the Minnesota Legislature, we were notified that Lori Swanson's office contributed heavily to the synthetic drug legislation advocated for by the Board of Pharmacy this past session. In order to gain a deeper understanding, we decided to do a data request with that Board. We obtained a draft copy of the synthetic drug legislation, which we are providing to the public for the first time below.

Particularly concerning is the definition of “drug” that was laid out in the first draft: “the term 'drug' shall also mean any compound, substance, or derivative—whether described as tobacco, herbs, incense, plant food, food, nutrient, dietary supplement, spice, bath salts, or any blend thereof or similar description—which is not regulated or approved for human consumption by the United States Food and Drug Administration or specifically permitted by Minnesota law.”

This definition of the word “drug” is so broad and vague that it is not understandable for the average citizen. In constitutional law, a statute such as this could be considered “void for vagueness” and unenforceable because of its overly broad and vague nature which encompasses all substances known to man that are not approved by the FDA. In continuing with the “void for vagueness” theme of this legislation, the synthetic drug legislation also enables the Board of Pharmacy to collaborate with the AG's office to issue cease and desist orders against any business that is deemed to be selling any substance that has a similar effect on the body as any Schedule I or II substance.

This section of the legislation was defended by the Board of Pharmacy's executive director in committee hearings even though other testifiers explicitly noted that stores such as hardware stores or gas stations, which sell paint and adhesives, could be served with a cease and desist order because these substances can mimic Substance I or II drugs if huffed.

If elected Attorney General, I would not ghostwrite legislation for government agencies, especially legislation that includes increased budget allocations to the AG's Office and the arbitrary authority to shut down Minnesota businesses that my Office, along with the Board of Pharmacy, disagree with. The fact that the AG's Office is ghostwriting legislation should not be a secret that is only discoverable by individuals who do data requests. #HandsOffAngela: County prosecutor refuses to release emails: The last in our series of data requests was filed with the Lac qui Parle County Prosecutor Richard G. Stulz, asking him for “any and all data that document his discussions, documents, and communications about cannabis.” This was done as part of our ongoing quest to bring justice to Angela Brown, who is being charged by Mr. Stulz' office with child endangerment for providing cannabis hash oil to her teenage son to alleviate symptoms from his traumatic brain injury.

The first problem we ran into was the fact that his e-mail address was not publicly available on the County's website in order for us to send him the data request. Not only is his email address difficult to obtain, we were also diverted by him on the phone when directly asking him how to file a data request with his office. When we spoke to him on the phone, he specifically told us to email the County's Auditor-Treasurer, Jake Sieg, to file a data request. We found this to be odd, but filed with Mr. Sieg anyways. When Mr. Sieg responded, he predictably referred us back to Mr. Stulz' office and finally provided us with his email address. When we finally received a response from Mr. Stulz related to our data request, he said, “I have received your request for government data, but obviously the information that you seek would be protected by attorney work product.” Even though Mr. Stulz did not cite MN Statute 13.393, which he is relying upon in his response, my campaign did some legal research to determine whether it is correct. We discovered that neither the attorney-client privilege nor the work-product doctrine cited in Minnesota Statutes Section 13.393 exempts from disclosure all of the data related to his work as the Lac qui Parle County Attorney. Given the limiting language in the last phrase of section 13.393, i.e., “…nor shall this section be construed to relieve any responsible authority, other than the attorney, from duties and responsibilities pursuant to this chapter and section 15.17,” clearly the Legislature did not intend that any and all data used, collected, stored, or disseminated by a public attorney, or government data held by a government entity that relate to the conduct of its legal affairs, are exempt from disclosure under Chapter 13.     The attorney-client privilege protects those parts of his work as the Lac qui Parle Attorney that communicates legal advice that would not have been disclosed but for the existence of the privilege and, in order to be protected by the work product doctrine, material must contain opinions, conclusions, legal theories, or mental impressions of counsel, and it must have been prepared in anticipation of litigation.   Since there is no work product immunity for documents prepared in the regular course of business rather than for purposes of litigation, it is my campaign's opinion that Mr. Stulz has not properly responded to our data request. It is our assumption that Mr. Stulz has obtained a large amount of data with keywords related to cannabis in his time as prosecutor. If not from anywhere else, it is presumed that he possesses a fair number of emails from the Minnesota County Attorney's Association related to the medical cannabis legislative push last session. Especially given the callous manner in which Mr. Stulz is prosecuting Angela Brown, the public ought to know what types of organizations have contacted his office in the past with information related to cannabis policy and the conversations he has had in return, if any.

Twitter sues U.S. government

Firm wants customers to know about national data requests

WASHINGTON (CNN) —Twitter is suing the U.S. government in an effort to loosen restrictions on what the social media giant can say publicly about the national security-related requests it receives for user data.

The company filed a lawsuit against the Justice Department on Monday in a federal court in northern California, arguing that its…

As is the tradition at Google since 2009, the company  has published a new transparency report that focuses on the user data requests that Google has received in the last six months of the year 2013 from government agencies around the world. As you probably have already guessed, the US takes the first place in […]

The post 2013 vs 2009 – US government doubled its number of Google user data requests appeared first on SecurEncrypt - Encrypt files, emails and SMS. #security

2013 vs 2009 – US government doubled its number of Google user data requests

As is the tradition at Google since 2009, the company  has published a new transparency report that focuses on the user data requests that Google has received in the last six months of the year 2013 from government agencies around the world. As you probably have already guessed, the US takes the first place in the list, and the runners-up are are not even close.

For starters, Google shows in the…