A new report shows that people in America are often willing to give up personal data in exchange for deals, but they resent doing so.

US libraries are doing something even the most security-conscious private firm would never dream of: deleting sensitive information in order to protect users

We guard our own data but not our contacts'.

Some local police departments scan social media, send drones aloft and monitor surveillance cameras.

This chapter discusses the implications of wearable technologies like Google Glass that function as a tool for occupying, commodifying, and profiting from the bio- logical, psychological, and emotional data of its wearers and those who fall within its gaze. We argue that Google Glass privileges an imaginary of unbridled exploration and intrusion into the physical and emotional space of others. Glass’s recognizable esthetic and outward-facing camera has elicited intense emotional response, partic- ularly when “exploration” has taken place in areas of San Francisco occupied by residents who were finding themselves priced out or evicted from their homes to make way for the techno-elite. We find that very few trade and popular press articles have focused on the failure of Glass along these dimensions, while the surveillance and class-based aspects of Google Glass are fundamental to an accurate rendering of the product’s trajectory and the public’s emotional response to this product. The goal of this chapter is to foreground dimensions of surveillance and economics, class and resistance, in the face of unending rollouts of new wearable products designed to integrate seamlessly with everyday life—for those, of course, who can afford them. Ultimately, we believe more nuanced, intersectional analyses of power along race, class, and gender must be at the forefront of future research on wearable technologies. Our goal is to raise important critiques of the commodification of emotions, and the expansion of the surveillance state vis-à-vis Google’s increasing and unrivaled information empire, the longstanding social costs of which have yet to be fully articulated.

Tips, Tools and How-tos for Safer Online Communications

The governments of Australia, Germany, the UK and the US are destroying your privacy.  Some people don’t see the problem…

A loophole in how the government interprets a 1970s-era student privacy law can give companies a way to access student data without parental approval.

​Protecting your data usually means navigating a miserable user experience.

As Web culture permeates the higher education experience, from Yik Yak conversations to collaborative digital assignments, questions of data privacy ...

Congress just made it easier for the NSA and FBI to get your private information. Tucked into Congress’ 2,000 page spending bill passed today was a controversial cyber-surveillance rider. This

Providing Internet access to the public has come to be an important service, but it can be quite a challenge to do so in a secure, cost-effective way. Maintaining patron privacy on a shared, public computer is one of the problems that librarians face every day. My solution was to switch to an open source (OS) platform for our patron computing.

In the 1950s, a group of scientists spoke out against the dangers of nuclear weapons. Should cryptographers take on the surveillance state?

Gone are the days of single-browser tracking. Accordingly, cross-device tracking – the process of tracking a single consumer across all of the consumer’s

It turned out that the extension corruption issue was reported in a separate report and by the time I reported the combination of the two issues, the fix for the corruption issue was already out in Chrome Beta! Both issues are now fixed in the latest stable version.

Many media reports on (as well as at least one response to) the FTC complaint we submitted yesterday about Google’s violation of the Student Privacy Pledge have focused heavily on one issue—Google’s