DOCSLIB.ORG

Internet Health Report 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Mozilla Foundation Internet Health Report 2019 Established in 2003, guided by the Mozilla Manifesto, the Mozilla Foundation believes the Internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible to all. The Mozilla Foundation is a not-for-profit organization that exists to support and collectively lead the open source Mozilla project. It views its work as part of a global movement for a digital environment that aims at putting people in charge of their own data and that makes the internet a more democratic place by mobilizing a critical mass of consciouus internet users. Mozilla Foundation Internet Health Report 2019 Many researchers, fellows, writers and allies of Mozilla generously contributed data and ideas alongside countless readers who participated. The report was edited by Solana Larsen. Kasia Odrozek is the project manager. Jairus Khan is the outreach coordinator. Stefan Baack is the data and research analyst. Eeva Moore is the editorial as- sistant. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Na- tionalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (BY) license, which means that the text may be be remixed, transformed and built upon and be copied and redistributed in any medium or format even commercially, provided credit is given to the author. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Creative Commons license terms for re-use do not apply to any content (such as graphs, figures, photos, excerpts, etc.) not original to the Open Access publication and further permission may be required from the rights holder. The obligation to research and clear permission lies solely with the party re-using the material. First published in 2019 by transcript Verlag, Bielefeld © Mozilla Foundation, chapters by respective authors Cover layout: Maria Arndt, Bielefeld Typeset by Michael Rauscher, Bielefeld Printed by Majuskel Medienproduktion GmbH, Wetzlar Print-ISBN 978-3-8376-4946-8 PDF-ISBN 978-3-8394-4946-2 https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839449462 Content Introduction | README �������������������������������������������������������������������� 7 Spotlight �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13 Let’s ask more of AI ��������������������������������������������������������������������� 13 The power of cities ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 Rethinking digital ads �������������������������������������������������������������������24 Is it safe? �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������29 Understand the issue: Privacy and security ���������������������������������������29 23 reasons not to reveal your DNA ��������������������������������������������������� 31 In defense of anonymity �������������������������������������������������������������� 35 Ransomware payments add up �������������������������������������������������������37 Coordinating complaints for data privacy in Europe ���������������������������� 39 Your mobile apps are tracking you ���������������������������������������������������40 How open is it? ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 43 Understand the issue: Openness ���������������������������������������������������� 43 Show me my data, and I’ll tell you who I am ����������������������������������������45 Internet slowdowns are the new shutdowns ���������������������������������������48 Taxing social media in Africa ��������������������������������������������������������� 51 Tracking China’s censorship of news on WeChat ���������������������������������54 Inside Germany’s crackdown on hate speech �������������������������������������55 Wikidata gives wings to open knowledge �������������������������������������������57 “Deepfakes” are here, now what? ����������������������������������������������������59 Who is welcome? ������������������������������������������������������������������������� 63 Understand the issue: Digital inclusion �������������������������������������������� 63 Recognizing the bias of artificial intelligence �������������������������������������65 More than half of the world is online, but … ����������������������������������������67 Technology’s inhumane underbelly ��������������������������������������������������68 A global push to identify everyone, digitally ���������������������������������������70 Tech employees power up �������������������������������������������������������������72 Women journalists feel the brunt of online harassment ������������������������75 Codes of Conduct now guide open source communities ������������������������77 The world’s slowest internet is the least affordable �����������������������������79 Who can succeed? ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 81 Understand the issue: Web literacy �������������������������������������������������� 81 Sex education in the digital age ����������������������������������������������������� 83 Who babysits your children’s data? ��������������������������������������������������85 Decoding images of war in Syria �����������������������������������������������������87 The challenge of democracy in the digital era ������������������������������������89 Spot the surveillance with virtual reality �������������������������������������������92 Breaking free of the addiction machine ������������������������������������������� 93 Who controls it? ���������������������������������������������������������������������������97 Understand the issue: Decentralization ��������������������������������������������97 When a hurricane zaps the internet �������������������������������������������������99 The new investors in underwater sea cables �������������������������������������102 What if Facebook were owned by its users? ��������������������������������������104 How do the biggest internet companies make money? �������������������������106 An open source alternative for “the cloud” ���������������������������������������108 Participate ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 113 Feedback ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 117 Introduction | README Is the internet unhealthy? We planted this question in your mind with the title of this report and in the questions we ask throughout. But you will not be getting a simple yes or no answer. As you may have gathered, this publication is neither a country-level index nor a doomsday clock. We invite you to join us in assessing what it means for the internet to be healthy, and to participate in setting an agenda for how we can work together to create an internet that truly puts people first. Our intention with this compilation of research, interviews and analysis (designed with input from hundreds of readers in collaboration with over 200 experts) is to show that while the worldwide consequences of getting things wrong with the internet could be huge – for peace and security, for political and individual freedoms, for human equality – the problems are never so great that nothing can be done. More people than you imagine are working to make the internet healthier, and getting things right, by apply- ing their skills, creativity, and even personal bravery, to business, technology, activism, policy and regulation, education and community development. This annual report is a call to action to recognize the things that are hav- ing an impact on the internet today through research and analysis, and to embrace the notion that we as humans can change how we make money, gov- ern societies, and interact with one another online. Part of the trouble in explaining how to make the internet ‘healthier’ is that so much goes unseen. As internet users, we tend not to think about fibre optic cables beneath the seas, or the men and women who assemble our elec- tronic devices, let alone about the decision processes coded into “intelligent” machines. Many of us don’t even know how our favorite internet companies profit, or how our personal desires and traits are tracked as we go about our lives. 8 Internet Health Report 2019 If we’re completely honest, a lot of us would probably prefer not to know. Why ruin the magic of the instant gratification we get at thepush of a button, hiding all technological processes behind the scenes. The downside is that we often don’t recognize the things in need of systemic change before the dra- matic news headlines assault us. We prefer to imagine that we are protected: by high tech internet companies, by governments, by other more savvy users. We make choices all the time: about what software to use, what security risks to take, what steps to take to protect the privacy of our children and genetic relatives. As advocates for a healthier internet, let’s now make better choices. Let’s fight to change what is wrong and join with others to make things right. In reading the Internet Health Report, let’s cast a glance at the seen and unseen opportunities of the internet, and consider this rich, diverse, complex ecosystem as one that adapts to our collective actions and changes over time. Our “spotlights” this year invite you to consider three topics that in each their way are ‘hidden in plain sight’ and deserve special attention if we are to improve
Recommended publications
  • HTTP Cookie - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia 14/05/2014

    HTTP Cookie - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia 14/05/2014

    HTTP cookie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 14/05/2014 Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history Search HTTP cookie From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Navigation A cookie, also known as an HTTP cookie, web cookie, or browser HTTP Main page cookie, is a small piece of data sent from a website and stored in a Persistence · Compression · HTTPS · Contents user's web browser while the user is browsing that website. Every time Request methods Featured content the user loads the website, the browser sends the cookie back to the OPTIONS · GET · HEAD · POST · PUT · Current events server to notify the website of the user's previous activity.[1] Cookies DELETE · TRACE · CONNECT · PATCH · Random article Donate to Wikipedia were designed to be a reliable mechanism for websites to remember Header fields Wikimedia Shop stateful information (such as items in a shopping cart) or to record the Cookie · ETag · Location · HTTP referer · DNT user's browsing activity (including clicking particular buttons, logging in, · X-Forwarded-For · Interaction or recording which pages were visited by the user as far back as months Status codes or years ago). 301 Moved Permanently · 302 Found · Help 303 See Other · 403 Forbidden · About Wikipedia Although cookies cannot carry viruses, and cannot install malware on 404 Not Found · [2] Community portal the host computer, tracking cookies and especially third-party v · t · e · Recent changes tracking cookies are commonly used as ways to compile long-term Contact page records of individuals' browsing histories—a potential privacy concern that prompted European[3] and U.S.
  • June 10, 2021 President Joseph R. Biden the White House 1600

    June 10, 2021 President Joseph R. Biden the White House 1600

    June 10, 2021 President Joseph R. Biden The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: We, the undersigned civil rights, civil liberties, privacy, government accountability, and consumer rights organizations, urge your Administration to ensure that any new transatlantic data transfer deal is coupled with the enactment of U.S. laws that reform government surveillance practices and provide comprehensive privacy protections. The United States’ failure to ensure meaningful privacy protections for personal data is the reason that a growing number of countries are concerned about trans-border data flows. Until the United States addresses this problem, concerns about data transfers to the United States will remain, and data flow agreements are likely to be invalidated. Recent history demonstrates that any transatlantic data transfer agreement will be subject to litigation to determine whether it provides adequate protection for personal data. In 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union invalidated the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor agreement. And in July 2020, the successor agreement, Privacy Shield, was also invalidated by the same court. Without reform of U.S. surveillance and privacy laws, any new transatlantic data transfer deal will likely face a similar fate. The only way to fully address these issues and enter into a lasting transatlantic agreement is to harmonize data protection standards between the European Union and the United States. There have been calls for the United States to strengthen and modernize its privacy laws since long before the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation came into effect in 2018. The modern concept of the right to privacy was invented in the United States – but now we lag behind many other nations on privacy protections.
  • Survey on Privacy Preserving in Social Networks

    Survey on Privacy Preserving in Social Networks

    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Index Copernicus Value (2015): 78.96 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391 Survey on Privacy Preserving in Social Networks S. Mayil1, Dr. M. Vanitha2 1Research scholar, PG & Research Department of Computer Science, JJ College of Arts and Science (Autonomous), Pudukkottai, Tamil Nadu, India 2Assistant Professor, Ph.D. and Research Department of Computer Application, Alagappa University, Karaikudi , Tamilnadu. Abstract: The development of online social networks and the release of data network resulting in the risk of leakage of personal confidential information. This requires privacy protection before the data network is published by the service provider. Data privacy online social networks are important in recent years. Therefore, this research is still in its infancy. This article describes the generalization techniques of anonymous social networking data with sufficient privacy for harsh environments while preserving the validity of the data. The loss metric information, iloss, is used to check the information due to the loss of the generalized amount. While these networks make frequent data sharing and intercommunication between users can instantly and privacy problems that may arise are very explicable with their obvious immediate consequences. Although the concept of privacy can take different forms, the ultimate challenge is how to prevent the invasion of privacy when personal information is available. Basic social networks, co-statements, and their associated primary motivations. The following describes how to protect privacy, relying on technical analysis and link social networks to disclose sensitive user information. Keywords: Data Privacy, Data Publishing, Privacy Preserving, Social Network, Service Provider. 1. Introduction data may affect the privacy of individuals.
  • CJEU Ruling on Facebook Action on January 25, 2018: Class Action, Model Case Or No Jurisdiction?

    CJEU Ruling on Facebook Action on January 25, 2018: Class Action, Model Case Or No Jurisdiction?

    CJEU ruling on Facebook action on January 25, 2018: Class action, model case or no jurisdiction? In August 2014, lawyer and data protection expert Max Schrems filed a lawsuit against Facebook with his competent court in Vienna, as previous complaints in Ireland have not been decided by the Irish Data Protection Commissioner since 2011. Now the CJEU decides on the admissibility of the lawsuit against Facebook. Previously, in 2015 Schrems brought down the EU-US “Safe Harbor” system through a case against Facebook at the CJEU. Dispute solely on jurisdiction and on two questions Facebook has submitted various grounds with the court in Vienna, why the procedure should not be heard at all. The majority of these attempts to prevent the procedure have already been rejected by the Austria courts over the past three years. What remained, were two questions: (1) whether Mr Schrems is a "consumer" or has lost this status through his pro bono work as a privacy advocate; and (2) whether he can bring claims of other users jointly in a "class action". The class action is financed by ROLAND Prozessfinanz AG. Facebook wants each of the 25,000 other users to have to sue in a separate procedure - which would make the legal costs skyrocket and a case against Facebook financially impossible for most users. In Facebook’s view, the same legal and factual issues should therefore be trailed 25,000 times in front of thousands of European courts and judges (“divide and conquer”). These two questions were submitted to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling by the Austrian Supreme Court.
  • Facebook: Where Privacy Concerns and Social Needs Collide

    Facebook: Where Privacy Concerns and Social Needs Collide

    Edith Cowan University Research Online Theses: Doctorates and Masters Theses 2020 Facebook: Where privacy concerns and social needs collide Sonya Scherini Edith Cowan University Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses Part of the Communication Technology and New Media Commons, Mass Communication Commons, and the Social Media Commons Recommended Citation Scherini, S. (2020). Facebook: Where privacy concerns and social needs collide. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ theses/2331 This Thesis is posted at Research Online. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/2331 Edith Cowan University Copyright Warning You may print or download ONE copy of this document for the purpose of your own research or study. The University does not authorize you to copy, communicate or otherwise make available electronically to any other person any copyright material contained on this site. You are reminded of the following: Copyright owners are entitled to take legal action against persons who infringe their copyright. A reproduction of material that is protected by copyright may be a copyright infringement. Where the reproduction of such material is done without attribution of authorship, with false attribution of authorship or the authorship is treated in a derogatory manner, this may be a breach of the author’s moral rights contained in Part IX of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). Courts have the power to impose a wide range of civil and criminal sanctions for infringement of copyright, infringement of moral rights and other offences under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). Higher penalties may apply, and higher damages may be awarded, for offences and infringements involving the conversion of material into digital or electronic form.
  • A Collaborative Framework: for Privacy Protection in Online Social Networks

    A Collaborative Framework: for Privacy Protection in Online Social Networks

    A Collaborative Framework: for Privacy Protection in Online Social Networks 4 4 Yan Zhu1,2, Zexing Hu1, Huaixi Wang3, Hongxin Hu , Gail-Joon Ahn 1 Institute of Computer Science and Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China 2Key Laboratory of Network and Software Security Assurance (Peking University), Ministry of Education, China 3School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China, 4Laboratory of Security Engineering for Future Computing (SEFCOM), Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA Email: {yan.zhu.huzx.wanghx}@pku.edu.cn. {hxhu,gahn }@asu.edu Abstract-With the wide use of online social networks (OSNs) , Although some new techniques were introduced in these the problem of data privacy has attracted much attention. solutions, it is still necessary for a centralized server to Several approaches have been proposed to address this issue. enforce access control, which cannot protect the privacy of One of privacy management approaches for OSN leverages a key users against the centralized server. Also, some solutions management technique to enable a user to simply post encrypted contents so that only users who can satisfy the associate security implemented access control at client-side but their approach policy can derive the key to access the data. However, the key should be synchronous, requiring multiple users to be online management policies of existing schemes may grant access to simultaneously. unaurhorized users and cannot efficiently determine authorized One of efficient ways for enforcing access control in OSN users. In this paper, we propose a collaborative framework is to allow users to put the encrypted data on the server and which enforces access control for OSN through an innovative key management focused on communities.
  • GDPR Is Here: What to Expect Now?

    GDPR Is Here: What to Expect Now?

    GDPR Is Here: What to Expect Now? Brett Lockwood Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP June 19, 2018 Agenda Principal Obligations Related Developments Under GDPR & What’s Ahead E.U. / U.S. Compliance Comparison & Best Practices GDPR Obligations Summary • E.U. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was effective May 25, 2018 • Replaces 1995 E.U. Privacy Directive, with many new provisions: enhanced personal rights, affirmative consent, breach notice and DPO requirements • Very broad and process oriented • Essentially: If you process personal data of a person in the E.U. or processing is in the uE.U. or yo are a controller or processor in the E.U. then GDPR applies • Penalties –greater of €20 MM or up to 4% of worldwide revenue GDPR Obligations Key Definitions • Data Subject: an identified or identifiable natural person • Personal Data: any information relating to a Data Subject • Processing: any operation which is performed on personal data • Controller: one who determines the purposes and means for the processing of personal data • Processor: one who processes personal data on behalf of a controller (Art. 4) GDPR Obligations Major Requirements • Governing Principles for Processing Personal Data (Arts. 5, 24 & 25) ► Processing must be lawful, fair and transparent ► Processed for specified, explicit and legitimate purpose ► Adequate, relevant and limited to processing purpose ► Must be accurate and kept updated without delay ► Maintained only as long as necessary for processing purpose ► Must ensure appropriate security GDPR Obligations Major Requirements (Continued) • Affirmative consent from data subject (or guardian) or another lawful basis (e.g., legitimate interest or contract fulfillment) is needed to process data (Arts.
  • Table of Contents

    Table of Contents

    Table of Contents Foreword ...................................................................................................................... v Preface ........................................................................................................................ vii Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... xi Table of Cases ........................................................................................................... xxi Table of Legislation ...................................................................................................lvii Chapter 1 Introduction Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 Core Principles that apply to Internet Law ................................................................... 5 Importance of the internet ....................................................................................... 5 User-generated content ........................................................................................... 9 Internet v traditional modes of communication .................................................... 11 Liability of intermediaries .................................................................................... 22 The E-Commerce Directive .................................................................................. 28 Privacy and anonymity ........................................................................................
  • Annual Report 2017

    Annual Report 2017

    101110101011101101010011100101110101011101101010011100 10111010101110110101001 10101110001010 EDRi EUROPEAN DIGITAL RIGHTS 110101011101101010011100101011101101010011100101 10101110110101000010010100EUROPEAN010 DIGITAL001 RIGHTS11011101110101011101101100000100101101000 DEFENDING RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS ONLINE 01000111011101110101 101011101101010000100101000100011101110111010101110110110000010010110100001000111011101110101 101110101010011100 101110101011101101010011100 101011101101010000100101000100011101 101011101101010000100101000100011101110111010101110110110000010010110100001000111011101110101 101110101010011100 101110101011101101010011100 1010111011010100001001010001000111011101110101011101101100000 101011101101010000100101000100011101110111010101110110110000010010110100001000111011101110101 101110101010011100 101110101011101101010011100 10101110110101000010010100010001110111011101010111011011000001001011010000100011101110111010 101011101101010000100101000100011101110111010101110110110000010010110100001000111011101110101 101110101010011100 101110101011101101010011100 101011101101010000100101000100011101110111010101110110110000010010110100001000111011101110101 101110101010011100 101110101011101101010011100 EUROPEAN DIGITAL RIGHTS EUROPEAN DIGITAL RIGHTS ANNUAL REPORT 2017 1011011101101110111010111011111011 January 2017 – December 2017 1011011101101110111011101100110111 101011101101010000100101000100011101110111010101110110110000010010110100001000111011101110101 101110101010011100 101110101011101101010011100 101011101101010000100101000100011101110111010101110110110000010010110100001000111011101110101
  • Civil Society Organizations and General Data Protection Regulation Compliance

    Civil Society Organizations and General Data Protection Regulation Compliance

    Civil Society Organizations and General Data Protection Regulation Compliance Challenges, Opportunities, and Best Practices ABOUT THE ORGANIZATIONS The Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros, are the world’s largest private funder of independent groups working for justice, democratic governance, and human rights. Open Society funded this report hoping to make a contribution towards stronger data governance in civil society. Data Protection Support & Management is a niche data protection consultancy specializing in assisting humanitarian organizations, nonprofits, research institutes, and organizations dealing with vulnerable data subjects and complex processing environments These efforts aim to help these groups and organizations innovate responsibly and comply with their data protection obligations. © 2020 Open Society Foundations This publication is available as a PDF on the Open Society Foundations website under a Creative Commons license that allows copying and distributing the publication, only in its entirety, as long as it is attributed to the Open Society Foundations and used for noncommercial educational or public policy purposes. Photographs may not be used separately from the publication. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Vera Franz is deputy director of the Open Society Lucy Hannah is a data protection consultant with Information Program where she oversees the global Digital Protection Support & Management, a certified portfolios responding to threats to open society data protection officer, and an Australian-qualified created by information technology. For the past lawyer, working across Europe and the United decade, Franz has worked to develop and implement Kingdom. Hannah has extensive experience in field strategies to confront corporate data exploitation privacy, data protection, and regulatory compliance. and government surveillance.
  • The Eprivacy Regulation (Epr) and Its Impact on Banks

    The Eprivacy Regulation (Epr) and Its Impact on Banks

    www.pwc.ch/ Is ePrivacy defining the future standard of data protection for the banking industry? The ePrivacy Regulation (ePR) and its impact on banks “The question of the right to privacy must be one of the defining issues of our time.” S. Shetty PwC | The ePrivacy Regulation and its impact on banks | 2 Table of Contents The ePrivacy Regulation (ePR) and the impact on banks 3 The ePrivacy Regulation in a nutshell 3 Legal background 3 Key requirements of the ePrivacy Regulation 4 The ePrivacy Regulation and the GDPR 5 How does the ePrivacy Regulation affect you? 7 Key challenges of ePR for banks 7 What is our suggested approach 8 Prioritisation is key 8 How can PwC help? 9 Contacts 9 3 | The ePrivacy Regulation and its impact on banks | PwC The ePrivacy Regulation (ePR) and its impact on banks The European Commission is finalising the ePri- The cornerstones of the proposed rules on Privacy vacy Regulation (ePR), which may become effec- and Electronic Communications are: tive, together with the EU GDPR, from May 2018. All electronic communications must be confi- The ePR, which protects the right to respect for dential private life and communications, is one of the key Listening to, tapping, intercepting, scanning and pillars of the EU’s Digital Single Market Strategy. storing of, for example, text messages, e-mails or voice calls will not be allowed without the consent This new regulation is designed to be ‘future- of the user. The newly introduced principle of proof’: all existing and future communication confidentiality of electronic communications will technologies are and will be subject to it.
  • Neo4j.Rb Documentation Release 10.0.1

    Neo4j.Rb Documentation Release 10.0.1

    Neo4j.rb Documentation Release 10.0.1 Chris Grigg, Brian Underwood Aug 01, 2020 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Terminology...............................................3 1.1.1 Neo4j..............................................3 1.1.2 ActiveGraph...........................................3 1.2 Code Examples..............................................4 1.2.1 Node..............................................4 1.3 Setup...................................................4 2 Setup 5 2.1 Ruby on Rails..............................................5 2.1.1 Generating a new app......................................5 2.1.2 Adding the gem to an existing project.............................6 2.1.3 Rails configuration.......................................6 2.2 Any Ruby Project............................................7 2.2.1 Driver Instance.........................................7 2.3 What if I’m integrating with a pre-existing Neo4j database?......................8 2.4 Heroku..................................................8 3 Upgrade Guide 9 3.1 How to upgrade to activegraph?..................................9 3.1.1 Transaction API......................................... 10 3.1.2 Exceptions........................................... 10 4 Rake Tasks 11 5 Node 13 5.1 Properties................................................. 13 5.1.1 Labels.............................................. 14 5.1.2 Indexes and Constraints..................................... 14 5.1.3 Labels.............................................. 14 5.1.4 Serialization..........................................