Don't Trust the FBI to Properly Use Its Massive Facial Recognition Database
You might consider buying a hat to cover your face—and hoping you’ll be allowed to wear it.
You might consider buying a hat to cover your face—and hoping you’ll be allowed to wear it.
An ACLU brief bolsters the state's case, arguing that people reasonably expect information about the medications they take will be kept confidential.
Government-mandated privacy regulations will allow the most powerful companies to game it to their advantage.
Marijuana legalization changes the constitutional status of canine olfactory inspections.
Preventing a slow march toward automated authoritarianism?
Police now have to get a judge's permission before they rummage through your bins.
As the cryptocurrency continues use, issues of privacy and fungibility crop up.
A district court decision from several years ago, which I just ran across.
Plus: the biggest trouble with Devin Nunes' Twitter lawsuit, the Senate fails to override Trump's Yemen veto, bad news for the gig economy, and more...
Section 215 has been used to secretly access our private data, but hasn't accomplished much.
After years of political fights over our privacy, a potential end in mass phone metadata collection
They're joined by an arrested spa owner and manager in fighting the release of surveillance video, with an array of big media companies on the other side.
Plus: Violence in Sri Lanka leads to social media suppression, and the White House wants to make it harder for pretrial diversion participants to get government jobs.
Facebook would prosper in a less robust market.
The court held that plaintiffs' sexual harassment claims (under Title IX) and religious objection claims (under the Illinois RFRA and under the Free Exercise Clause) could go forward, at least for now.
The feds have allegedly abandoned the program. These four want to make sure it stays dead.
The privately maintained database has billions of records on drivers across the country.
Backdoors into your texts and private message provide far more information than your phone metadata.
Pervasive real-time police surveillance is not just theoretical anymore.
Plus: Facebook says it's pivoting to privacy, and congressional Democrats want to "save the internet."
For years, security state advocates fought to maintain the authority to snoop on your phone records. Are they really giving up?
A cashless society is a monitored (and potentially controlled) society.
Paul cited Barr's past support for warrantless surveillance. He's right to be worried.
The latest in London Mayor Sadiq Khan's war on knife ownership.
Good intentions, private fears, and innovative entrepreneurs vying for government contracts are killing privacy in public places.
Elizabeth Nolan Brown talks about DHS's "Blue Campaign," which is pushing hotel and airline workers to call the feds if they suspect human trafficking.
It's a good idea that libertarians should applaud.
The possibilities and perils of voluntary, privately operated biometric screening
Hacking tools end up in the hands of some dangerous people. So, apparently, do our government hackers.
Compelled use of facial and finger recognition features runs afoul of the Fifth Amendment.
Among other things, it would call for investigators to review three years' worth of a would-be gun buyer's social media postings for "excessive discriminatory content."
Your new national ID is hacker-bait that complicates journeys but won't make you any safer.
On Monday, a federal appeals court considered Grindr's guilt in a case involving app-based impersonators.
Santa Claus is coming to town with all his liquids in a single quart-sized baggie.
The tech giant actually stands to gain by legally hamstringing competition with tough regulations.
Air marshals might still treat you like a terrorist. But they'll stop documenting your every move.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Equal Justice Society, and others are challenging the practice in court.
Australians who want to protect their data from surveillance now need to turn to extra-legal means.
Parliament passes a bill at the last possible moment to give officials the power to weaken encryption.
It's been dubbed "NYC's Anti-Airdrop Dick Pic Law," but the bill is much broader than that.
Tech companies are compiling incredibly detailed dossiers about you.
Cases in which a majority of the Court fell down on the job.
But what does that mean? Readers, tell me what you think, and how it fits with your general theory of constitutional interpretation (e.g., textualism, originalism, etc.).
The Supreme Court's call for supplemental briefing in Frank v. Gaos will lead it to a difficult question.