#library privacy

[libraryprivacy]

Senator Sessions does not acknowledge the significant First Amendment and privacy interests in protecting library records from warrantless surveillance.  From a Senate hearing transcript: Sessions: “You tell me a principled reason why you could subpoena someone’s medical records, their bank records, their telephone records, but not subpoena their library records. Is there one?”Director Mueller: “I do not believe so….”Sessions: “Thank you. And I know that they are entitled to every kind of constitutional protection, a library is, that anyone else is. But I do not think a library deserves a special protection over any other business. A library does not have any sanctity. Why does a library have sanctity that your medical records do not have? They think it is sanctified, I will admit. I just disagree that it deserves special protection.”[5] Senator Sessions opposed the USA Freedom Act, which ended the bulk collection of phone records by the NSA under Section 215 and was supported by the intelligence community.

Coalition Raises Privacy Concerns on Sessions Nomination for Attorney General | Center for Democracy & Technology

[libraryprivacy]

Patrons of Erie County's public libraries have new tools at their disposal to better track their reading habits and manage their accounts.  But anyone who attempted to access some of the new features for the first time throughout January - such as saved title lists, saved searches, and borrowing histories - received the following message: "The feature you have selected is associated with personal data in your patron account. Such data may be accessed by law enforcement personnel without your consent. Do you wish to continue?" That message has since been amended for clarity. Mary Rennie, executive director of the Erie County Public Library, said law enforcement officials need a warrant to access the data, and that the library rarely gets requests for such records.

In digital age, privacy remains a priority for Erie County libraries

[libraryprivacy]

a spokesperson for the ACLU Northern California said in a statement to the San Francisco Examiner on Monday that the organization continues to oppose the technology and urged The City to reject the effort. “RFID has profound implications for civil liberties in San Francisco, including for immigrants’ rights. It’s more important than ever that San Francisco safeguard privacy, free speech, and civil liberties for all,” Nicole Ozer, technology and civil liberties policy director of the ACLU of California, said in the statement. EFF spokesperson Rebecca Jeschke told the Examiner on Monday “we do have some concerns about this proposal, but we haven’t looked at it as closely as we’d like.” Herrera said in the memo that “the use of a combination of library cards without RFID tags and library items bearing passive RFID tags (with a limited range of under one meter) offer increased circulation efficiency while ensuring patron privacy.”

SF Public Library revives plan to install microchips in books - by j_sabatini - The San Francisco Examiner

[libraryprivacy]

Librarians, Act Now to Protect Your Users (Before It’s Too Late)

Books checked out from a library and terms searched on library computers can reveal a teenager’s questions about sexual orientation, a neighbor’s religious leanings, or a student’s political interests. Libraries across the country, particularly public libraries, make it part of their mission to serve the most vulnerable and underserved user groups, including users who are homeless, unemployed, or recent migrants or refugees. And when government agents come looking, these library users need librarians to have their back.

Since the passage of the Patriot Act in particular, librarians have purged user records when necessary to fight against unconstitutional government demands and pushed back against (unconstitutional) National Security Letters (NSLs). Librarians also stood with EFF and the ACLU when we worked to pass the California Reader Privacy Act in 2011.

With the recent election of President-elect Donald Trump, many libraries are rightfully worried about a renewed threat to their users’ privacy. If the incoming administration sticks to its promises to identify and deport millions of people, monitor individuals based on their religious beliefs, and expand libel laws, for example, libraries could receive unprecedented government requests for information on their users.

Read More

[libraryprivacy]

Chalk up another group concerned about privacy and data security issues: libraries and archives. This week, the San Francisco-based Internet Archive announced a drive to raise $5 million to set up a mirror repository of the entire internet and place it in Canada for safety The New York Public Library announced a change this week to its privacy policy, informing users that it would retain less information about their activities. The American Library Association, headquartered in Chicago, embraced that move and encourages others, including telling public libraries to encrypt all communications and lock up stored data to protect it from a prying government.

Libraries and archives fear Feds may press them for more user data | McClatchy DC

[libraryprivacy]

From Indiana University Library 

[libraryprivacy]

The Campaign for Reader Privacy has received a letter from the Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Gerald Stuart Evans, confirming that the Justice Department will continue to respect protections for the privacy of bookstore and library records that may be targeted under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act.

Justice Department Reaffirms Reader Privacy Protections

[libraryprivacy]

Cybersecurity and digital surveillance versus usability and privacy. Why libraries need to advocate for online privacy

Kim, B. (2016). Cybersecurity and digital surveillance versus usability and privacy Why libraries need to advocate for online privacy. College & Research Libraries News, 77(9), 442-451.

Read