National Digital Identification - What does National ID Look Like Around the World? [Part 1/2]

National Digital Identification – What does National ID Look Like Around the World? [Part 1/2]

By Jason Cheung on May 23, 2019 | Tagged with , , , ,

Map of the Earth, by jimht. From Wikipedia, used under CC 1.0

Countries around the world are implementing digital solutions for identifying their citizens and residents. However, the benefits of using national digital identification systems are also met with risks. In this post, we will discuss forms of identification look like, and pose questions around opportunities and pitfalls of its use.

What is Identity?

First of all, we need to discuss the differences between identification and identity. Stanford researchers [1] defines identity as “personal characteristics or attributes that cannot naturally be expressed in terms of a social category” that make a person or group. In contrast, identification is a document that is issued by a government and can prove a person’s identity [2]. Importantly, identification documents are not created by people themselves, but instead are issued by a country or institution that also provides the identity of which the identification is tied to. An example of an identification would be a passport, which serves as proof that a person is a national of the country issuing the passport.

Discrepancies between identities proclaimed by identification and the identity held by an individual may cause frustration and unnecessary obstacles. Consider this thought experiment: what would you do if one day you received in the mail a passport for a country you do not belong to? How does the identity asserted by the passport impact your true identity? A related example happened to a British woman, who received a passport that had the wrong photograph associated with her name [3]. Besides putting additional stress on her travel plans, the situation raised questions about the safety of her personal information.

What is a National Digital Identification?

In its simplest form, a digital identification could consist of a computer file containing unique identifiers, for example, a Social Security Number (SSN) in the the United States, corresponding to each citizen. That is, it is not the physical artifacts that permit authentication, such as an ID card or passport, but the data itself that makes up a person’s national digital identity. Importantly, this data may impact their lives if it is needed to transact services from a national body.

Elements of a national digital identification may include:

  • text (e.g. name, SSN, date of birth)
  • audio (e.g. voice samples)
  • biometric data (e.g. fingerprints, blood sample, iris sample, hair sample)
  • tokenized representations (e.g. passport, ID chip card)

Aspects of life that a national digital identification may impact include:

  • travel
  • financial services
  • healthcare
  • telecommunications
  • participation in election voting

Here are some examples of what it looks like in different countries:

Estonia

Estonian ID Card, by Aron Urb, from Wikipedia. Used under CC BY 2.0

Estonia [4] has one of the most integrated national digital identification systems in the world. Citizens are able to use tokens such as their mobile device to authenticate their identity for services, like nationalized health insurance and online banking. The country also allows citizens to vote and declare taxes online. In 2017, a vulnerability in the cryptography of the Estonian digital identification system allowed for the reverse engineering of individual’s private keys using intercepted public keys [5]. This lead to the compromise of about 750,000 digital identities to potential misuse. Since then, the affected ID cards were updated with new credentials.

China

Similar to Estonia, China also has a very integrated national digital identification system. It’s system is involved in telecommunications, travel, banking, and lodging. Every citizen is required to apply for a Resident Identity Card when they are 16 years old, which is issued by the country’s Public Security Bureau [6]. China is also working on implementing the national identification system on mobile phones to transition away from offline ID cards. In 2017, China updated their policy of “real-name registration”, which requires the linking of users’ internet accounts with their Resident Identity Cards in order to post comments online [7].

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom implemented a digital identification system for citizens to access government services online in 2016, known as GOV.UK Verify [8]. It enabled citizens to receive services such as claiming tax refunds, receiving Universal Credit benefits, checking pensions, and signing mortgages. The system partners with the country’s financial institutions to facilitate identity management and account creation, and citizens sign in via these “certified companies” to access the e-government portal [9].

Singapore

Singapore’s national identification involves a compulsory National Registration Identity Card for citizens and permanent residents [10]. Like China and Estonia, Singaporean citizens can also use their mobile phones as a token to authenticate their identity for government services online. Currently, it operates a program called “MyInfo,” which enables citizens to view the data the government has on file about income, licenses, property, and education [11]. Singapore plans to roll out a “National Digital Identity System” in 2020, which aims to “provide users
with a single digital identity to transact with both the Government and private sector” [12].

List of Information Available in MyInfo – from MyInfo. Used under the Fair Dealing Exception in the Canadian Copyright Act, s.29

Canada

Lastly, the digital identity of citizens in Canada is currently distributed across several systems. For example, on the federal level, residents are able to view personal income tax and benefit information through the Canadian Revenue Agency’s MyAccount portal [13], and can login to a provincial identity system to manage their driver’s license [14]. There have been proposals within the country for the additional development of a Canadian national digital identity by groups such as the Canadian Bankers’ Association [15].

How does national digital identification look like in your country? What is the scope of the data that is part of your national digital identity? You can share and discuss national digital identities in the comment section below. 

In the next section of this article, we will look at potential benefits and risks for citizens enrolled in national identity programs.

Edited by: Monique Rodrigues

Read More | No Comments

Digital Identity Digest (April 2019)

By Monique Rodrigues on May 14, 2019 | Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Are universities more vulnerable to academic dishonesty?

In April, actor Felicity Huffman and 12 other parents decided to plead guilty in the largest-ever college admissions scandal in the U.S. She is accused of paying to falsify her children’s test scores to secure admission to elite colleges. Echoing the scandal, NPR discusses how students are finding it easier to cheat college processes, for example, through services like an online essay market. For instance, a student revealed she received half-dozen offers of help within minutes of tweeting her frustration with an assignment. She ended up hiring one that costed U$10 per page, and argued that she didn’t think it was cheating because she wasn’t plagiarizing.

Ashley Finley, senior adviser to the president for the Association of American Colleges and Universities, raised concerns about the growth of the so-called essay mills market. The piece points out that, as an answer to this global industry, YouTube is working to block videos that promote dishonest behaviour. In addition, a company has even created a software called Authorship Investigate, which assess the “writing fingerprint” by inspecting documents’ metadata.

Do you think students are more prone to academic dishonesty? Are universities doing enough to curb it? Take a look at our tutorial about academic honesty and share your thoughts with us in the comment box below.

Is AI being more harmful than beneficial to people’s lives?

In a talk hosted by Vox’s Recode Decode, the co-founders of the AI Now Institute, Meredith Whittaker and Kate Crawford, discussed how artificial intelligence is affecting our lives right now. One of the examples they brought up was Amazon’s intent to build a résumé scanner, which ended up being very biased against female applicants. “They definitely did not want that to be the outcome, which is why they didn’t release the tool, but it also tells you something about the pile of résumés that they had,” Crawford said. Another example she mentioned was HireVue, a system already in use that records people’s patterns during a job interview and matches them with a company’s highest performers. “Might sound like a good idea, but think about how you’re basically just hiring people who look like the people you already have,” she said.

Whittaker concluded the talk saying that those issues don’t mean that the people behind the companies developing AI are bad, but that there are “very different incentive structures” in place. “Are these the incentives we want to govern a technology that is this pervasive and this powerful? And if not, what are the changes we would need to put in place?” she asked.

Some of the questions posed by the co-founders of the AI Now Institute go in the same direction of the discussion raised by the former Digital Tattoo contributor Margaux Smith in a blog post about the ethics of algorithms. For her, “we need to mobilize knowledge of how certain algorithms affect people negatively,” and this includes having extensive public participation around the issue.

How do see this discussion currently? What else we as citizens should be doing to hold the corporations behind AI accountable?

Is there a way to make Facebook a less damaging public forum?

In an op-ed published by the Globe and Mail, Eric Jardine, assistant professor at Virginia Tech and fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, raised concerns about the risk of misinformation and malicious interference on Canada’s coming federal election. “A storm is coming […] There’s no question that Canada’s election will be in the crosshairs of foreign operators. The only question is, will we be ready?” he wrote. Part of what worries him is Facebook’s inadequate response to situations like the mosque attack in New Zealand, which was streamed live on the platform.

Building on this op-ed, the podcast Canadaland discussed the necessity of more regulations for Facebook. The podcast’s host Jesse Brown interviewed Natasha Tusikov, a criminology professor at the York University, who studies the intersections between technology and regulation. For Tusikov, “Facebook is the most prominent bad actor” on multiple serious situations that have happened on the realm of internet. As examples, she mentioned the Cambridge Analytica scandal and Facebook’s role on the Myanmar genocide. She is concerned about the company’s intent to make rules about hate speech; instead, she believes this should be a governmental effort with proper accountability tools. As a solution, Tusikov suggests that we should start thinking about changing Facebook’s business model completely – for example, shifting from an ad-based model to a subscription one.

As Canadaland’s episode title suggests, do you believe Facebook is worth fixing? In 2016, we interviewed some students and all of them said they used social media to stay informed. So, what is our role as users in holding Facebook accountable?

Read our most recent blog posts:

What’s happening:

TORONTO:

Exhibition – Ambition, Innovation & Excellence: A Decade at Skule™

When? From May 1 to May 31 (see website for daily hours)

Where? U of T St. George (Downtown) Campus – Myhal Centre for Engineering Innovation & Entrepreneurship, 55 St. George Street, Toronto, Ont.

Symposium – Governing Cities in the 21st Century

When? May 18, from 8:30 am to 2 pm (EST)

Where? U of T St. George (Downtown) Campus – Bram and Bluma Appel Salon, Toronto Reference Library, 2nd Floor, 789 Yonge Street, Toronto, Ont.

Symposium – What do we mean when we say ‘content moderation’?

When? May 25 and May 26, from 10 am to 5 pm (EST)

Where? U of T St. George (Downtown) Campus – Hart House, 7 Hart House Circle, Toronto, Ont.

Talk – Cities by Design: Smart Communities and Villages, with Prof. Joseph Wong

When? May 28, from 4:10 pm to 6 pm (EST)

Where? U of T St. George (Downtown) Campus – Jackman Law Building, Faculty of Law, J225, 78 Queens Park, Toronto, Ont.

Edited by: Defne Inceoglu

Read More | No Comments

A Model for Your Data Double: What Your Behaviour Tells Algorithms

By Jason Cheung on May 7, 2019 | Tagged with , , , , ,

What your data means, by Panoptykon Foundation. From Panoptkyon Foundation, used under Fair Dealing, Copyright Act, 1985. s. 29.

Have you thought about the impacts of your actions while online? Maybe you have deleted a post that you made in error, or accidentally clicked on an ad while browsing the web. Although these actions were accidental to you, they may have been perceived as intentional actions that characterize your online identity to an algorithm that is tracking your behaviours. You may be aware that several popular services such as Facebook [1] and Google [2] employ behaviour tracking tools such as cookies [3] and mouse tracking [4] to create logs of user behaviours and descriptions. Descriptions can include elements such as the browser you are using, IP address [5], and device identifiers such as MAC addresses [6].

A diagram published by the Panopytkon Foundation [7], a Polish not-for-profit organization, frames the dialogue between the behaviours and actions of a user and the algorithms that track and generate insights about that user, as a layered process with three distinct layers. As data moves outwards from a source user and progresses through the layers, it transforms from machine-logged actions into human readable insights and a persona that grows with each new behaviour logged by behaviour surveillance algorithms.

In the most central layer, information is generated as users share data about themselves on a variety of accounts and across a variety of domains and networks. As Katarzyna Szymielewicz describes [8], this is the only layer in which users have control over. Subsequent layers of a user’s data double are generated through the inference of information and observations about a user’s online browsing behaviour.

In the second layer, machine-readable aspects of your behaviour are collected. Information such as which content a user ignored, whether they are using a VPN [9], and the speed at which they type are added the user’s persona description. Alone, these observations may seem innocuous or benign, however, Szymielewicz explains that when aggregated among thousands or millions of users, demographic data can be inferred by comparing a user’s behaviour to a statistical baseline.

“Your data are analyzed by various algorithms and compared with other users’ data for meaningful statistical correlations. This layer infers conclusions about not just what we do but who we are based on our behavior and metadata.” – Katarzyna Szymielewicz, Co-founder of Panoptykon Foundation

These inferences and insights that are produced by the algorithms that process the information shared by a user in the first layer and the observations made in the second layer make up the data in the third layer. Importantly, these conclusions are generated by data analysis software, and may in fact not be representative of the user’s true personality. Depending on the data generated by a user, these conclusions can be quite definitive: examples include conclusions on a user’s religious beliefs, existence of mental illness, eating habits, time spent at work, and much more.

So What?

This current model of machine-generated conclusions about users is unsettling because it does not provide users with recourse for incorrect assumptions made about someone. Steps are being made to increase the transparency of personal information, such as legislation like the European GDPR [10], which lets individuals view or delete information about themselves from social media sites and other private businesses that collect, or have collected, personal information in the past [11]. In Canada, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA [12] mentions that individuals can request deletion of personal information held by third parties when they successful demonstrate an inaccuracy or incompleteness, as mentioned in its principles for individual access. Szymielewicz suggests that companies should stop guessing about us and instead open the doors for a more transparent conversation and for customers to have a chance to verify or correct incorrect conclusions, or delete them entirely.

Take a look at the diagram below. Each circle in the model only lists some examples of the types of information that belongs in each layer.

The three layers of your digital shadow, by the Panoptykon Foundation. From Panoptkyon Foundation, used under Fair Dealing, Copyright Act, 1985. s. 29.

Discussion Questions

  • Were you aware that observations of your IP address, content consumed, and browsing history may be tracked?
  • What do you think are the conclusions made about you by tracking algorithms?
  • How do you take control of the information and conclusions inferred from the information you share online?
  • Was there anything in the Panoptykon diagram that surprised you or was not known before?
  • What suggestions do you have to others looking to take control of the conclusions that algorithms made about them?

You can submit an original comment or reply to another reader’s comments in the discussion forum below!

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not constitute legal or financial advice.

Always do your own research for informed decisions.

Edited by: Elyse Hill

Key Source:

  • Your digital identity has three layers, and you can only protect one of them [Quartz]

Additional Sources

Read More | No Comments

Building Online Communities: Digital Tattoo at the IM Conference 2019

By Monique Rodrigues on May 3, 2019 | Tagged with , , , , ,

Digital Tattoo Student Team 2018/2019: Jason Cheung (U of T), Samantha Summers (U of T), Defne Inceoglu (U of T), Monique Rodrigues (UBC), and Elyse Hill (U of T). Photo by Kathleen Scheaffer/Digital Tattoo.

This year has been a very special one for the Digital Tattoo team. On the week of April 15, I flew to Toronto from Vancouver to participate on our very first Digital Tattoo Talks. The event was part of the Information and Museum Studies Conference hosted at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Information.

This was also the first time the entire Digital Tattoo student team met in person. Since we are a cross-institutional initiative between UBC and U of T, we only get to connect with each other online.

Participating in the two-day conference itself was a wonderful experience of learning, collaboration and community. It was even more rewarding for having the opportunity of closing it with a panel promoted by Digital Tattoo. After months of preparation, our talk gathered six speakers to present initiatives happening in Toronto and globally, and discuss how those projects relate to community-building.

Digital Tattoo Talks

We had the pleasure to have Ryan Merkley, CEO at Creative Commons, as our keynote speaker. Merkley talked about the role of Creative Commons on promoting more access to knowledge. He is an avid advocate for open access and for more collaboration in scholarship. For him, collective action should drive our communities moving forward.

You can find more highlights of his talk on this Twitter thread:

In the second part of our event, we hosted four lightning talks followed by a Q&A with speakers. To start, Tasneem Mewa and Rayna Sutherland, co-editors-in-chief of the Open Praxis Forum, talked about their work to create a more inclusive space for early career researchers and activists.

Following, Alex Jung, the first Wikipedian-in-Residence at the University of Toronto Libraries, made the case that Wikipedia encourages collaboration and enriches knowledge-building.

Then, Josh Dyer, director of marketing at Myseum of Toronto, presented the innovative idea behind the institution: a museum that was born without walls. They promote both online and offline experiences, but not without listening to what their community wants.

Our final speaker was Carol Yeung, a former Sidewalk Toronto fellow, who spent last summer meeting with smart city stakeholders to inform the project. Yeung discussed the benefits of data collection to enhance people’s lives, but highlighted the importance of creating mechanisms to respect citizen’s privacy and will.

Check out this Twitter thread for more on the four lightning talks:

Organizing this event and participating on the conference was a truly amazing experience that changed the way I think about collaboration and community. It was outstanding for me – and I’m sure for other participants – to hear from people with such diverse backgrounds and experiences reflecting on ways to improve their communities. I was inspired by what I learned there and I’m looking for ways to incorporate it on my next experiences. 

Speakers during their presentations at the Digital Tattoo Talks. Photos by Defne Inceoglu/Digital Tattoo.

And here are some of the impressions from the other Digital Tattoo student coordinators about the IM Conference in general and the Digital Tattoo Talks:

Defne Inceoglu

The IM Student Conference 2019 was a fantastic experience. It was a great experience, having the chance to work in person together to facilitate our keynote and lightning talks. Each of us brought our own strengths to the team which ended up creating a well-rounded event. The panel brought to light some really fascinating and at times polarizing projects happening within our community here at the University of Toronto and across the city. I am grateful for having the opportunity to have worked with the with the conference organizers, Inforum staff and with the Faculty of Information. I am also filled with pride for my team members, who all are so hard working, dedicated, intelligent and kind. 

Elyse Hill

The Digital Tattoo Talks allowed for us to gather a broad community of students and professionals in the information field to collaborate and learn. Through this experience, we were able to connect individuals and engage in discussions surrounding open access, digital identity, and online communities. I’m incredibly proud of all of the hard work our team put in to make this a successful and meaningful experience for attendees, presenters, and organizers alike!

Jason Cheung

The IM Student Conference 2019 was a great opportunity for me to learn and develop as a professional in the information field. One of the most useful insights I learned at the conference included the introduction to the concept of “Core Competencies” by Ciara O’Kelly and Jordan Pederson. That really helped to clear up how I should approach job applications in the information field by speaking in familiar language that speaks to the skills that an organization is looking for. Of course, facilitating the Digital Tattoo Talks was an amazing opportunity to end my time at the Faculty of Information with a high note. Gathering speakers that were passionate about protecting and advocating for digital identity within the contexts of online communities helped to show me that events such as these can provide a worthwhile opportunity to share ideas with individuals that may be just as passionate about an idea. In the future, I plan on seeking out more conferences such as the IM Student Conference 2019 in which I can prepare and bring along ideas I am passionate about.

Samantha Summers

This conference provided such a unique and wonderful opportunity for me to collaborate with the Digital Tattoo team this year. It is so rewarding to work with a team with such diverse skills to produce such an exciting and dynamic event, and I cannot wait to see what this team accomplishes going forward. My thanks go to the whole Digital Tattoo team for their endless support and energy throughout the year.

To wrap up such a fantastic conference, we encouraged participants to contribute to an ongoing knowledge sharing activity that is open to everyone. The idea behind it is to keep the conversation going and promote a collaborative experience.

You can contribute as well! Just access this interactive Padlet and share your thoughts on the question: What does sense-making, communication, and collaboration mean for your community? If you prefer, use the comment box below. 

For additional resources, you can access: https://wiki.ubc.ca/Sandbox:Digital_Tattoo_Talks.

Let’s keep building a strong online community together!

Read More | No Comments

Job-seeking in the Digital Age

By samantha summers on May 1, 2019 | Tagged with , , ,

Illustration courtesy of Defne Inceoglu

As this academic year draws to a close, students looking toward their graduation with be flooding the job market looking for exciting opportunities to start off their careers. Many of them will head straight to the internet to kick-off their job search, relying on online career seeking services to put them in touch with potential job opportunities. While convenient, these services often collect a massive amount of data about their users, and not everyone takes the time to read privacy statements. With this in mind we decided to investigate some of these platforms to determine who they are, what they offer, and what kind of security risks they pose users.

 

Monster

Monster was founded in 1999 and is one of the most popular career seeking websites in the world. According to their website, twenty-nine resumes are uploaded to the site, 7900 jobs searched for, and 2800 jobs viewed every minute.[1] They offer a career advice centre and have a wide international reach.

What you need to know. Monster makes it unclear what happens to your information when you choose to delete your account with them, which means they probably store it all. This leaves you vulnerable to data breaches well after you delete your account, and Monster has fallen victim to multiple substantial data breaches in the past.

 

Indeed

Indeed aggregates job postings from a variety of job boards, making it a one-stop shop for finding opportunities. You can have a job digest sent to you every few days, outlining recent opportunities in your field and area of interest. Indeed sees over 250 million unique visitors per month, and adds 9.8 jobs to its listings every second. It also offers a blog featuring information about job seeking, career trends, and other related issues.

What you need to know. Indeed makes it clear that it maintains all of the information it collects about you after you terminate your profile. As explained above, this means you remain vulnerable to potential data breaches whether or not you continue to use the service.

 

WhoPlusYou (Magnet)

WhoPlusYou is the career seeking portal for Magnet, which was co-created in 2014 by Ryerson University and the Ontario Chamber of Commerce. This not-for-profit focuses on connecting employers with local communities and individuals. Their particular focus is on serving students, younger people, disabled persons, newcomers to Canada, Indigenous peoples, and other individuals who face barriers in the job-seeking process. They offer a blog with career information, and resources for specific users and communities, such as a toolkit for helping Syrian refugees integrate into the Canadian job market.

What you need to know. In order to fulfill its aims of helping connect underemployed communities to career opportunities, Magnet collects more information about marginalized status than other career seeking platforms. While Magnet does not sell or share any of the data it collects (save with potential employers), it also is unclear what happens to your profile once it is deleted, meaning that there is a chance this sensitive information will remain vulnerable if you close your Magnet account.

 

Workopolis

Workopolis was founded in 1999 with the goal of helping Canadians find jobs, with a particular focus on providing services (and finding employment) in both French and English. They provide a blog with features broken down into helpful and searchable categories (“Job search,” “Resume writing,” “Interviewing,” “Negotiating,” “On the job”).

What you need to know. Workopolis won’t sell your data, but they will share it with others. Unlike most other career-seeking services, you can request to have all your data scrubbed from their servers when you terminate your account with them.

 

Glassdoor

Founded in 2008 with the aim of increasing transparency in the job-seeking process, Glassdoor now sees 64 million unique visitors every month. The service is perhaps best known for its employer review feature, which allows employees (past and present) to leave honest reviews about their experience working for employers. Glassdoor also offers a platform for sharing questions asked in interviews with specific companies, allowing applicants to better prepare for the interview process. They also offer a blog featuring posts about career-seeking and navigating the workplace.

What you need to know. Glassdoor shares your information with “affiliates” in order to provide “personalized content… as well as other promotional content and services.” In plainer terms, this means Glassdoor shares your non-personal information with advertisers to allow them to show you personalized ads. You can’t opt out of cookies on Glassdoor, and they will maintain your information on their servers even once you delete your account.

 

Before you use any internet service, it is important to know what you are getting into. In the case of career-seeking services we are required to pass on lots of information, from our addresses to our entire histories. It is important that we share this information only with services we trust. Always do your research.

 

Happy job hunting!

[1] “About.” Monster.com. Accessed March 28 2019. https://www.monster.com/about/.

Interested in learning how to leverage social media to help you land a job? Check out our Job Hunt tutorial here!

Written by Samantha Summers

Edited by Defne Inceoglu

Image Illustration courtesy of Defne Inceoglu

Read More | No Comments

In the News: Mozilla’s 2019 Internet Health Report

By Jason Cheung on April 30, 2019 | Tagged with ,

Mozilla released their third annual report on the state of the internet and its impact on global society [1]. They asked the following five questions about the internet and identified both positive and negative trends since their report in 2018:

  1. Is it safe?
  2. How open is it?
  3. Who is welcome?
  4. Who can succeed?
  5. Who controls it?

When compared to Mozilla’s 2018 Internet Health Report [2], which highlighted key issues such as IOT, ‘fake news’, and Big Tech, it seems like people have began to pay more attention to their digital identities since these issues came into the forefront of attention, accelerated by cases such as the Cambridge Analytica/Facebook scandal surrounding the 2016 Presidential election in America [3], and data breaches for companies like Equifax, Marriott, and many other organizations that occurred in 2017 and 2018 [4].

In each of these questions, Mozilla informs and challenges the reader about a specific topic, such as ransomware [5] and app tracking [6] through case studies and animated infographics. The report features three spotlight articles that explore AI [7], online advertising [8], and smart cities [9].

When you look at trends like these — and many others across the Report — the upshot is: the internet has the potential both to uplift and connect us. But it also has the potential to harm and tear us apart. – Mark Surman

Mozilla’s briefing about the 2019 Internet Health Report [10] written by Mark Surman, summarizes the report with three positive and three negative conclusions, commenting that initiatives for privacy protection and digital responsibility are growing, and that developments in AI and biometrics should be monitored with care.

The full report is also available as a .pdf file as well [11].

What Do You Think?

  • What are your thoughts on the current state of the internet?
  • What are some of the recent developments in technology that have benefited you the most? Which are the ones that have caused you worry?
  • Which article did you find most interesting in Mozilla’s 2019 Internet Health Report?

Let us know what you think about this article and your responses to our questions in the comments below!

Image Credit

Health and Safety Report by TheDigitalArtist, from Pixabay. Used under CC BY 4.0

Additional Sources of Information:

  • Mozilla highlights AI bias and ‘addiction by design’ tech in internet health report [VentureBeat]
  • The State of the Internet [Akamai]
  • Internet Society Global Internet Report [InternetSociety]
  • Digital Trends 2019 [TheNextWeb]

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not constitute legal or financial advice.

Always do your own research to make informed decisions.

Edited by: Elyse Hill

Read More | No Comments

Book Review: Data and Goliath

By samantha summers on April 26, 2019 | Tagged with , , , , ,

Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World

Bruce Schneier (2015)

Digital Tattoo Rating: 4/5

1

2

3

4

5

Leave it on the shelf

Give it a skim

An informative read

Would give to a friend

A must read!!!

Summary

Guillaume Courtois, David and Goliath. c. 1650-1660. Oil on canvas. Public domain. Source.

Once, while talking with Digital Tattoo contributor Elyse, I jokingly remarked that Google owned me. “Oh, Google owns all of us,” she said. We laughed, but really, neither of us were joking. Between my reliance on Google Docs to keep my files stored in one central place and my reliance on Google Maps to get me from point A to point B (or to indicate how long it will take to get to there based on current traffic conditions), more or less every move I make is Google’s business. I mean that quite literally: Google is in the business of knowing what I’m up to and of owning that information. Even if I weren’t such a frequent user of Google’s services, they would still know everything about me. In Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World, Bruce Schneier demonstrates just how true this is. This carefully researched work explores how surveillance works today, how it impacts users, and just how dangerous it really is. From foreign governments to Internet giants like Google and Apple, Schneier explains how not many of my actions belong to me at all. Not many of yours belong to you, either.

Schneier breaks this book down into three major parts. “The World We’re Creating” explores data production and collection. “What’s at Stake” discusses the impact of this surveillance, and the threat it poses to individual security and liberty. Read back-to-back these two sections can seem pretty disheartening, so part three, “What to do About It,” comes as a relief. This section breaks down possible solutions for governments, corporations, and individuals.

All in all, this is an interesting, if not moderately horrifying, look into the world of data collection, governance, and surveillance. It is well worth a read for anyone interested in understanding data and the ways in which we are all being tracked, cookie by cookie.

Now what?

In the meantime, what can you do to make yourself less trackable? Here are some places to start.

  1. Avoid surveillance. Pay with cash instead of card, to start.
  2. Block surveillance. Encrypt everything you can.
  3. Distort surveillance. Clear your cookies regularly.
  4. Notice surveillance. Be on the lookout for opportunities for data collection. Never trust a pop-up asking for your email address.
    And most importantly:
  5. Talk about surveillance. Make sure others are aware of their data generation and data collection, and encourage others to be mindful of surveillance

Written by Samantha Summers

Edited by Elyse Hill

Slider image Untitled by Mohamed Hassan. Used under CC0 Public Domain license.

Read More | No Comments

Voice as Identity: Rising Use of Vocal Biometrics

By Jason Cheung on April 24, 2019 | Tagged with , , ,

In this blog post, we will look at:

    • What are voice biometrics?
    • Why would companies want to start using voice biometrics?
    • Are there risks in using voice biometrics?

Jersey Telecom telephone operator at switchboard, 1975, by Joseph A. Carr. From Wikipedia, used under CC BY 4.0

We may be becoming more familiar, and even more comfortable, with using biometric identifiers for authentication or security keys. A common usage of a type of biometric information – fingerprints – already exist in small and large scale applications: ranging from unlocking a person’s smartphone [1] to immigration clearance at an international airport [2]. In Canada, a new type of biometric information, voice data, is being used as a way to identify people, and businesses are beginning to implement this way of authentication. Voice data can be useful for replacing other forms of identification that could be hard to remember, such as social security numbers or bank card numbers, as it only requires a person to speak.

Voice Print Sample, by United States Department of Commerce. From Wikipedia, used under CC0 1.0.

Several Canadian companies have begun using voice biometrics to identify customers through the phone, including Royal Bank of Canada [3], Toronto Dominion Bank [4], Bank of Montreal [5], and Rogers Communications [6], to name a few. Each of these examples, they all seem to operate in a similar fashion. A customer enrolls into the voice recognition program with the company, or is offered the chance to enroll by a company representative. As they converse, the customer’s ‘voiceprint’, or vocal biometric data, is recorded by the company and used as a basis of comparison for future cases of authentication. No other forms of identification are required after a customer has verified their identity through a voice recognition program. None of the examples listed say much in regards to the details of how the voice recognition process operates, nor do they provide details about whether each company developed and owns their own kind of voice processing data, or whether it is outsourced to a third party vendor for authorization.

Drawing from my own experience as a client of one of the examples listed, I don’t remember ever providing my consent to enroll in the voice recognition program, but I found out I was by accident in a service call unrelated to the program. I was surprised, curious, and unnerved at finding out that this was the case. I aim to update this article once I have contacted that company to ask about records related to my provision of consent to enroll in the voice recognition program.

How can you check if you are enrolled in these voice recognition programs? If you suspect that a service provider or company you do business with has enrolled you into a voice biometrics program without your consent, you can call them to inquire about the existence of voice biometrics for that organization, and whether your voice is found in their voice database.

So What?

Voice biometrics may provide a positive effect for both the customer and the company using it: the customer doesn’t have to worry about remembering information and the company can reduce time spent verifying the identity of a customer through the telephone. However, the convenience provided by voice biometric programs also bring security and privacy risks. One such risk of the reliance on voice for identification is that since no other forms of identification that were previously required (e.g. address, date of birth, social insurance number) are needed after a customer has identified themselves through voice, an unauthorized agent may be able to use samples of a person’s voice to bypass this type of verification.

The CBC has reported on cases in which fraudsters attempt to call potential victims and asking if they can hear them, in an attempt to get the victim to respond “yes,” which is subsequently recorded as voice sample [7]. These voice samples would then be used to sign the victim for a purchase or service that the fraudster will use, with the victim being sent the bills afterwards. New technology is taking the potential for voice identification fraud to occur, as companies like Lyrebird, from Montreal, are able to transform source audio sample from a person’s voice into any requested phrase or tone of speech [8]. Yes, this is real technology that is being developed right now, and it can mimic your voice, provided the software can learn from a sample clip of the source. As a good precaution, do not answer any calls from phone numbers you do not recognize.

However, the more traditional ways of customer verification, such as providing your social insurance number, date of birth, or address, carries its own set of risks as well. You may have been provided warning that your telephone calls may be subject to recording for training and quality assurance purposes if you have called a service provider about an issue before [9]. The storage of these recorded conversations that contain sensitive and identifiable information means that you rely on the companies that provide you with services to also safely house and store those conversation recordings from unauthorized entry.

Discussion Questions

  • Have you enrolled in any voice biometric programs with a company you do business with?
  • Do you think the convenience provided by voice biometrics outweigh its potential risks and dangers?
  • What do you think about software made by companies such as Lyrebird that can potentially mimic your voice?
  • What do you think about companies that store recorded conversations potentially containing sensitive and identifiable information of customers?
  • What suggestions do you have to prevent your voice from being used as a sample clip for voice mimicry software?

You can submit an original comment or reply to another reader’s comments in the discussion forum below!

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not constitute legal or financial advice.

Always do your own research for informed decisions.

edited by: Elyse Hill

Additional Sources

  • Lyrebird Homepage [Lyrebird]
  • Vishing or Voice Fishing [RCMP]
  • Baidu AI Can Clone Your Voice in Seconds [Medium]
  • Technologically Advanced Phone Scams [Kaspersky Lab]
  • Prisons Across the U.S. Are Quietly Building Databases of Incarcerated People’s Voice Prints [The Intercept]

 

Read More | 1 Comment

In Conversation with Open Education Advocate Paul Stacey

By samantha summers on April 19, 2019 | Tagged with , ,

Paul Stacey, Executive Director at The Open Education Consortium. Photo courtesy of Paul Stacey.

Paul Stacey is a major proponent of open education initiatives. Currently the Executive Director of the Open Education Consortium, Stacey cofounded British Columbia’s open education initiative BCcampus and has worked at Creative Commons. Stacey has dedicated his life to working toward freely accessible education, and proving that open education isn’t just good for students, it’s also good for communities and bottom lines.

In January, we sat down to talk about openness, education, and what Stacey’s dream university looks like.

 

What do you see as the biggest roadblock to openness initiatives in the world right now?

There are many issues. If I was to distill it down to a few, I would say that our society has taught us that we are rewarded for the unique ideas we create. And those ideas, and the products of those ideas, are typically copyrighted and held as property by the original creator. That notion of uniqueness, also of property and reward for creating property – either through reputation or money – are the primary ways by which education and most of society operates.

 

What could the government be doing better to encourage people to use, invest in, seek out, and support openness initiatives?

If you look at other countries around the world, one of the ways public funds have been used to make things more open is in the gallery, library, archives, and museum sector. [For example], by using Creative Commons to take collections that are housed in those major public institutions and openly licensing them so the public has free access.

Canada hasn’t really followed that path at all, and I think that it could. We have some major museums and libraries that could, and very much should, be playing a role in ensuring the public has open access to use these materials. Europe is very active in [developing] the commons as a means of ensuring more equity among people. Equity and access are really issues in other countries that are being solved through things like City-as-Commons. So, what parts of the city can be made into a commons? That’s really blue-sky in the Canadian context. It’s an idea that nobody is even talking or thinking about. It’s a bit radical for Canada, but it’s not so radical in other parts of the world.

 

What could universities be doing better?

I think there’s a possibility for institutions to collaborate way more than they do. What do they have that they want to share with others? And what are they looking to receive from others? Then, forming partnerships around the haves and the needs where there is mutual reciprocity back and forth. I think this is tough to do within a province because there is so much competition at a province level. It actually is a little bit easier to do it globally, where you are partnering with an institution that doesn’t necessarily compete with you.

Another thing I’ve been thinking about is how universities can differentiate themselves. In the old days, open universities were ones that were open to non-traditional students. Why don’t we redefine the open university? It looks something like this: one that develops and uses open education resources, publishes all of its research in open access ways, produces MOOCs [Massive Open Online Courses], uses open policy and open policy governs things like promotion and tenure, uses open-source software and open-source hardware, and open data. This gets to the questions around student data: who owns all of that stuff about students? I think a new, contemporary, open university could adopt all of those practices and distinguish themselves from many others in the field by showcasing its openness in these contemporary ways.

 

This sounds like the ideal university. Purely academic, and actually getting research out of the university and into the public where it’s used.

Students, people like you, are the way this change is going to happen. There are people like me saying: “This is a great idea, this should be done.” But when students start to say that this should happen, then it’s taken seriously. When students start to say that we should be going open, it’s hard to ignore them.

 

___

 

Written By: Samantha Summers

Edited By: Monique Rodrigues

Feature image: Image Online Education_By_Kreatikar Used Under Pixabay License

Read More | No Comments

Digital Finance Series: Robo-Investing

By defne inceoglu on April 18, 2019 | Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Illustration courtesy of Defne Inceoglu

On this week’s episode of Digital Tattoo’s Digital Finance Series, contributor Victoria will be talking to us about Robo-Investing. See if you can (or should) trust online services to help you invest in the stock market. As the prevalence of these kinds of companies ramp up, what does it mean for the stock market? Can robots really predict trends accurately? Should we replace financial advisers with their digital substitutes? With special guest Jason Cheung, a fellow Digital Tattoo contributor.

Follow the links below to read up more on this topic!

WealthSimple: Robo-advisor

Money Sense: Robo-advisors vs. Couch Potato investing

New York Times: Financial Advice for People Who Aren’t Rich

MoneySense: Find out if you should go robo

Definition references:

‘Investment’

‘Financial Instrument‘

‘Fund’

‘Exchange Traded Fund’

 

 

Read More | No Comments

Our Podcast…

The Digital Tattoo Project Podcast raises questions, shares stories, speaks with experts and encourages us to consider our digital lives.

Listen to us on iTunes or Soundcloud

Twitter