David Canton (London Free Press) – There is a troubling worldwide trend to increased government surveillance and collection of personal information on individuals. Does it enhance public safety and law enforcement or is it just “security theatre” that tends to make people conform to social norms because they think they are being watched?
The Ontario Privacy Commissioner’s recently released a report on the Toronto Transit Commission’s plan to place thousands of security cameras on buses and subway cars. The Commissioner reviewed current studies and decided the evidence is inconclusive.
With any increased surveillance and data collection should come a high responsibility (consider it personal information stewardship) to ensure it’s secure, accurate, not abused and its use limited to serving its intended purpose. The commissioner set forth a detailed list of recommendations for the TTC to reflect that stewardship and minimize the privacy impact.
Recent reports suggest the upholding of that stewardship is by no means assured.
The Canadian Privacy Commissioner just released an unfavorable report following an audit of the RCMP’s exempt databanks. Over half of the files examined in the audit should not have been in an exempt bank.
National security investigation records and criminal operations intelligence files are sheltered in exempt data banks. That means individuals cannot gain access to information contained in those data banks through a Freedom of Information request.
To make matters worse, the Privacy commissioner found the same problem in an audit in the late 1980s. The RCMP agreed at the time to adhere to guidelines for managing exempt bank holdings.
You may want to reconsider bringing your laptop, camera or cellphone across the border. Some travellers have been required to allow U.S. Customs officials to log into either their personal or company-owned computers for the purpose of inspecting electronic data.
The search of electronics has been an increasing source of frustration for travellers who must surrender the electronics to cross a border or board a plane. Individuals have been asked to give their passwords to Customs officials to allow them to review the contents of the laptop. In some instances, laptops have been temporarily seized and the owners told that the item will be returned in a few days after it has been copied.
The question of whether border agents have a right to search electronic devises without suspicion of a crime is under review in the US courts.
The U.S. and Japan already require foreigners to be photographed and fingerprinted prior to entry into the country. Currently, the EU is proposing to fingerprint all foreign travelers entering and leaving Europe, including U.S. citizens. The affect is that identifying information, including biometric data, on tens of millions of citizens will be added to information databases and shared by governments worldwide.
Stories about inaccuracies in no-fly watch lists, the difficulty in correcting the lists, and the apparent blind trust in the data makes one question the effectiveness of those measures and stewardship of all that information.
One has to question whether the stewardship responsibility that goes along with the information is generally being upheld.
Recent Comments