Here’s an interesting, relatively new, privacy (with regard to publicity any way) issue that was reported today: locational privacy…
“Cell phone users secretly tracked in study” talked about a study, performed by Northeastern University, with their test subjects outside the U.S. within an “industrialized nation.”
In this study, the 100,000 subjects…people…involved did not know their cell phone use was being tracked. Researchers also had tracking devices put into cell phones, and then every two hours the physical location of the phone holder was logged.
The people carrying the cell phones had no knowledge that their movements were being tracked in this manner.
“Human tracking for science” brings in issues of “locational privacy.”
Here’s an interesting excerpt from the article where the researchers defend their study and tracking the 100,000 people without their knowledge…
“Study co-author Hidalgo said there is a difference between being a statistic — such as how many people buy a certain brand of computer — and a specific example. The people tracked in the study are more statistics than examples.
“In the wrong hands the data could be misused,” Hidalgo said. “But in scientists’ hands you’re trying to look at broad patterns…. We’re not trying to do evil things. We’re trying to make the world a little better.”
Knowing people’s travel patterns can help design better transportation systems and give doctors guidance in fighting the spread of contagious diseases, he said. The results also tell us something new about ourselves, including that we tend to go to the same places repeatedly, he said.
“Despite the fact that we think of ourselves as spontaneous and unpredictable … we do have our patterns we move along and for the vast majority of people it’s a short distance,” Barabasi said.
The study found that nearly half of the people in the study pretty much keep to a circle little more than six miles wide and that 83 percent of the people tracked mostly stay within a 37-mile wide circle.”
OW! [wince] It’s okay to spy upon individuals if they will just be considered as statistics…?
Boy, these statements certainly are deja vu, aren’t they?
Couldn’t they have done the study with the consent of the individuals involved?
Wonder what country was used for these unassuming test subjects…?? Well…not in the U.S (so they reported)…or in the EU…or in Canada…or…
Tags: awareness and training, Information Security, IT compliance, locational privacy, Northeastern University, policies and procedures, privacy, risk management, security awareness, security training, surveillance