jm + karlin-lillington   4

DNA databases: biology stripped bare
Unlike other biometrics, [DNA] also provides revealing [data regarding] thousands of other related individuals; even to an entire ethnic group.

Such markers may reveal a genetic predisposition towards cancer, or early onset dementia. Mining that data and linking it to family trees and thus, individuals, might interest insurance companies, or state health bodies, or – as ever – advertisers. Or? Who knows?

And the ability of a third-party potentially to reveal such information about me, about you, without us having any say, by providing their DNA profile for some personal purpose? Consider how furious so many have been on the basis of their Facebook profile data going to Cambridge Analytica via some Facebook friend deciding to do a quiz.

Facebook profile data is revealing enough. But DNA is you, fully, irrevocably, exposed. And whatever it displays about you right now, is trivial compared to what we will be able to read into it in the future.

That’s why this case isn’t just about a solitary law enforcement outcome, but about all of us doing an unintended, genetic full monty.
dna-matching  dna  data-privacy  privacy  future  health  cancer  insurance  karlin-lillington 
24 days ago by jm
Law to allow snooping on social media defies European court ruling
Karlin on fire:
But there’s lots in this legislation that should scare the public far more. For example, the proposal that the legislation should allow the retention of “superfluous data” gathered in the course of an investigation, which is a direct contravention of the ECJ’s demand that surveillance must be targeted and data held must be specifically relevant, not a trawl to be stored for later perusal “just in case”.
Or the claim that interception and retention of data, and access to it, will only be in cases of the most serious crime or terrorism threats. Oh, please. This was, and remains, the supposed basis for our existing, ECJ-invalidated legislation. Yet, as last year’s Gsoc investigation into Garda leaks revealed, it turns out a number of interconnected pieces of national legislation allow at least 10 different agencies access to retained data, including Gsoc, the Competition Authority, local authorities and the Irish Medicines Board.
surveillance  ireland  whatsapp  viber  snowden  snooping  karlin-lillington  facebook  internet  data-retention 
july 2016 by jm
Journalists, this GSOC story isn’t all about you, you know
Karlin Lillington in the Irish Times, going through journos for a shortcut:
All the hand-wringing from journalists, unions and media companies – even politicians and ministers – over the GSOC’s accessing of journalist’s call records? Oh, please. What wilful ignorance, mixed with blatant hypocrisy. Where have you all been for the past decade and a half, as successive Irish governments and ministers for justice supported and then rammed through legislation for mandatory call data retention for one of the longest periods in the world, with some of the weakest legal constraints and oversight?
karlin-lillington  privacy  data-protection  dri  law  journalists  gsoc  surveillance  data-retention 
january 2016 by jm
Backdoor legislation is no way to tackle thorny issue of copyright - The Irish Times - Fri, Mar 11, 2011
good article by Karlin Lillington on the attempted sneaking-through of an SI to 'deal with' filesharing. agreed on all counts
filesharing  piracy  ireland  law  karlin-lillington  legislation  fianna-fail  from delicious
march 2011 by jm

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: