Employees Injected With RFID Microchips

According to this Spychips.com news release, two u.s. employees were injected with rfid microchips at company request.

Cincinnati video surveillance company CityWatcher.com now requires employees to use VeriChip human implantable microchips to enter a secure data center, Network Administrator Khary Williams told Liz McIntyre by phone yesterday. McIntyre, co-author of "Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID," contacted CityWatcher after it announced it had integrated the VeriChip VeriGuard product into its access control system.

According to Williams, a local doctor has already implanted two of CityWatcher's employees with the VeriChip devices. "I will eventually" receive an implant, too, he added. In the meantime, Williams accesses the data center with a VeriChip implant housed in a heart-shaped plastic casing that hangs from his keychain. He told McIntyre he had no qualms about undergoing the implantation procedure himself, and said he would receive an implant as soon as time permits.

Bank of America Debit Card Security Breach

A security breach involving an undisclosed company has prompted Bank of America to cancel the debit cards of numerous customers, a spokesman for the country's largest bank said Tuesday.

This from a report by ZDNet.

Bank of America refused to release the name of the company involved, the exact number of customers affected or whether the company in question was online or a traditional brick-and-mortar establishment.

Bank of America issued letters to many customers notifying them of the breach and that their debit cards were no longer good. The bank is also telling customers to watch out for any unauthorized transactions on their statements.

Does the new Google Desktop pose a privacy risk?

According to this EFF article, that may be the case.

The new "Search Across Computers" feature will store copies of the user's Word documents, PDFs, spreadsheets and other text-based documents on Google's own servers, to enable searching from any one of the user's computers.

Said EFF Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "Unless you configure Google Desktop very carefully, and few people will, Google will have copies of your tax returns, love letters, business records, financial and medical files, and whatever other text-based documents the Desktop software can index. The government could then demand these personal files with only a subpoena rather than the search warrant it would need to seize the same things from your home or business, and in many cases you wouldn't even be notified in time to challenge it. Other litigants—your spouse, your business partners or rivals, whoever—could also try to cut out the middleman (you) and subpoena Google for your files."

Massive Data Collection Planned

According to this article in The Christian Science Monitor, "The US government is developing a massive computer system that can collect huge amounts of data and, by linking far-flung information from blogs and e-mail to government records and intelligence reports, search for patterns of terrorist activity. "

"The core of this effort is a little-known system called Analysis, Dissemination, Visualization, Insight, and Semantic Enhancement (ADVISE). Only a few public documents mention it. ADVISE is a research and development program within the Department of Homeland Security"

"What sets ADVISE apart is its scope. It would collect a vast array of corporate and public online information - from financial records to CNN news stories - and cross-reference it against US intelligence and law-enforcement records."

Who's helping the NSA?

CNET News.com asked telecommunications and Internet companies about cooperation with the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping scheme. We asked them: "Have you turned over information or opened up your networks to the NSA without being compelled by law?"

Here are the companies and their answers:

Company	Response
Adelphia Communications	Declined comment
AOL Time Warner	No [1]
AT&T	Declined comment
BellSouth Communications	No
Cable & Wireless*	No response
Cablevision Systems	No
CenturyTel	No
Charter Communications	No [1]
Cingular Wireless	No [2]
Citizens Communications	No response
Cogent Communications*	No [1]
Comcast	No
Cox Communications	No
EarthLink	No
Global Crossing*	Inconclusive
Google	Declined comment
Level 3*	No response
Microsoft	No [3]
NTT Communications*	Inconclusive [4]
Qwest Communications	No [2]
SAVVIS Communications*	No response
Sprint Nextel	No [2]
T-Mobile USA	No [2]
United Online	No response
Verizon Communications	Inconclusive [5]
XO Communications*	No [1]
Yahoo	Declined comment
* = Not a company contacted by Rep. John Conyers. [1] The answer did not explicitly address NSA but said that compliance happens only if required by law. [2] Provided by a source with knowledge of what this company is telling Conyers. In the case of Sprint Nextel, the source was familiar with Nextel's operations. [3] As part of an answer to a closely related question for a different survey. [4] The response was "NTT Communications respects the privacy rights of our customers and complies fully with law enforcement requests as permitted and required by law." [5] The response was "Verizon complies with applicable laws and does not comment on law enforcement or national security matters."

Congress Quizzes Phone Records Brokers

Politicians on Friday lobbed a dozen questions at companies that operate Web sites offering to sell a person's telephone calling record to anyone with $110 to spend.

This, according to an article in News.com

The article also states that "Members of the House and the U.S. Senate have already introduced proposals aimed at making such practices a crime, with prison time a possible sentence."

"Last week, the same House committee asked the Federal Communications Commission to ensure that the top five wireless and wireline providers were taking adequate steps to guarantee the privacy of their customers' records."

"The FCC responded by threatening two major providers, AT&T and Alltel, with $100,000 fines for failing to have a corporate executive personally sign off on the companies' compliance with federal regulations about protecting their customers' records."