(Image is in the Public Domain)

Why on Earth would anyone be surprised that when someone has access to a lot of sensitive data about people they know, they'd be tempted to look at it? Check out this story outlining several recent cases of government workers peeping on people with government databases.

Creation of government databases should be limited. Any that are legitimately created must be carefully controlled and restricted to only the people that need it. Breaches of trust should be visible and accounted for.

As far as I'm concerned, private databases owned by companies should fall into the same boat. No one should be tracked and tagged like an animal when they're not a convicted criminal.

You might not know who's watching

(Image is in the Public Domain)

It's important to know that in this case, the spy had physical access to the machine and there was a light that came on to tell the victim that the webcam was active. However, you should always be careful if you have a webcam installed to cover or turn it when not in use.

George W. Bush

(Image used under: Fair Use doctrine)

Bush, will be turning US spy satellites on Americans.

Finally! Some guts!

Senator Chris Dodd will block the FISA renewal bill as long as it grants retroactive immunity for their involvement in the illegal spying. Of course, the FISA bill should have been blocked anyway. I didn't read through it, but Bush signed it.

(Image used under: Fair Use doctrine)

Adding another nail to the coffin for citizen trust in Verizon (assuming there was any to begin with), it turns out that they did in fact participate in the illegal spying program.

Let the lawsuits begin…

Apple Corp.

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

Apple music files can now be purchased without DRM, but it seems that they hide information in the file with your name and account information.

Now the question becomes, what do they do with the information? Ars Technica theorizes that this might be a new form of identifying file sharers since the file itself will blab who the original owner was.

(Image is in the Public Domain)

I've heard about this before. Using the right equipment, you can see most of what is on someone's computer monitor from a good distance and through walls.

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

The Center For Democracy and Technology recently said in their newsletter:

The "lame duck" 109th Congress will return to Washington November 13 to take care of unfinished business before it finally ends. Among the bills President Bush has said he'd like to see passed is the NSA Domestic Spying bill. In addition, there is an effort afoot to slip into some other bill (probably a spending bill) a provision that would give the telecom companies immunity from liability for any unlawful assistance they have given to the government since 9/11.

What they're talking about is the bill that was introduced to congress backed by Bush that would not only NOT challenge the spying, but would in some forms legalize and expand the power to spy on Americans without a warrant. Fortunately, many major news outlets think that's not likely including the Baltimore Sun:

Republicans for months have known that no bill accomplishing Bush's goal could get filibuster-proof support from 60 senators. Sealing off any hope was what Democratic leader Harry Reid put on his lame-duck to-do list. The warrantless domestic surveillance bill was conspicuous in its absence.