Archive for Laws/Policies
Virtual Visitation via webcam technology
Posted by: | CommentsA Cook County Judge, Michael Panter utilized Fathers’ Rights Attorney Jeffery Leving’s new Virtual Visitation Law by awarding Leving’s client internet “web visitation” yesterday. This Las Vegas father will now enjoy video conferencing with his infant Chicago son twice weekly. This virtual visitation supplements the father’s “in-person” visitation as ordered by the court.
Attorney Jeffery Leving (http://dadsrights.com/), who co-authored the Illinois Virtual Visitation Law, which just went into effect this new year says “now geographically removed non-custodial fathers can have the next best thing to ‘in-person’ visitation with state-of-the-art technology.”
The new Illinois Virtual Visitation Law now updates the legal system with current technology to facilitate the critical father-child relationship when parents are separated. This will allow many military, incarcerated or other long distant non-custodial parents the legal right to utilize technologies such as email, telephone, internet and video conferencing to maintain contact with their children.
Known for advocating strong family bonds, Chicago divorce attorney Jeffery Leving and his firm have been reuniting fathers and children since 1981. Leving was selected as an expert resource for the first White House Roundtable and Town Hall Meeting in Chicago on Responsible Fatherhood.
ORADELL, N.J.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–U.S. Representative Bill Pascrell (D-NJ) will meet with 8th District constituents, leaders of after-school tutoring organizations and the news media on Monday, February 1 to discuss his recent sponsorship of H.R. 4391, “The Affordable Tutoring for Our Children” Act, which would allow middle class families to access dependent care flexible spending accounts (FSA) to pay for supplemental instructional services for their children, stimulate the nation’s economy, and help boost the academic achievement of students nationwide.
WHAT: News media briefing, reception, and Q&A session to mark the December, 2009 introduction of the” Affordable Tutoring for Our Children” Act. Following brief remarks by Congressman Pascrell, tutoring organization executives, and local parents, Congressman Pascrell will answer questions about the legislation and why he believes it represents an education and economic lifeline for the nation’s middle class.
WHO:
U.S. Representative Bill Pascrell, who last month introduced the bill, which has been referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Huntington Learning Center CEO Dzana Homan
Parents and their children of New Jersey’s 8th Congressional District – and current Learning Center clients — who would benefit from this legislation
Sylvan Learning CEO Jeffrey Cohen
Kumon North America Matt Lupsha, Vice President
Education Industry Association Executive Director Steven Pines
WHEN: Monday, February 1, 2010, 4:00 – 5:00 PM
WHERE: Sylvan Learning Center, Pilgrim Shopping Plaza, 305 Pompton Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044
BACKGROUND:
U.S. Representative Bill Pascrell’s “Affordable Tutoring for Our Children” Act (H.R. 4391), whose U.S. Senate counterpart, S. 744, was introduced by U.S. Senators Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Bill Nelson (D-FL) in April, 2009, will allow middle class families to access their dependent care flexible spending accounts (FSA) to pay for supplemental instructional services for children between the ages of 5 and 19 who have not obtained a high school diploma. The incentive would be available to employees earning under $110,000. Supplemental instructional expenses would be subject to a combined $5,000 cap with dependent care expenses.
About Huntington Learning Center
Founded in 1977, Huntington Learning Center is the nation’s longest-running supplemental education services provider. Today they continue to be an industry leader providing instruction in reading, writing, spelling, phonics, mathematics and study skills as well as SAT and ACT preparation to tens of thousands of students from kindergarten through 12th grade. Huntington prides itself on its unparalleled programs that help parents, caregivers and educators identify the gaps in skills and knowledge that can limit learning potential. Huntington’s personalized programs of instruction enable children to excel.
FCC Launches Initiative to Examine Future of Media
Posted by: | CommentsWASHINGTON — Today, the Federal Communications Commission launched an initiative on the future of media and the information needs of communities in the digital age. This initiative will examine the changes underway in the media marketplace, analyze the full range of future technologies and services that will provide communities with news and information in the digital age, and, as appropriate, make policy recommendations to the FCC, other government entities, and other parties.
“We are at a critical juncture in the evolution of American media,” said FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. “Rapid technological change in the media marketplace has created opportunities for tremendous innovation. It has also caused financial turmoil for traditional media, calling into question whether these media outlets will continue to play their historic role in providing local communities with essential news and civic information. With this crucial initiative, the FCC commits to fully understanding the fundamental changes underway in the media marketplace and examining what impact such changes may have for Commission policies, while vigorously protecting the First Amendment.”
The Commission issued a Public Notice posing preliminary questions that the FCC will consider as it prepares a report on the future of media in the digital age later in 2010. Initial topics under consideration include: the state of TV, radio, newspaper, and Internet news and information services; the effectiveness and nature of public interest obligations in a digital era; the role of public media and private sector foundations; and many others. The initiative will not include any effort to control the editorial content of any type of media.
The FCC also launched a preliminary Web site that will serve as an arena for public discussion on the future of media and any public policy recommendations. At launch, the Web site includes a forum for citizens and experts to weigh in on key questions, and an area for consumers to describe the health of, or problems with, media in their communities.
The public can participate in the proceeding via the traditional comment filing system, as well as the Future of Media Web site, www.FCC.gov/FutureofMedia. All comments will be deemed part of the official record. The Commission will conduct interviews, review existing studies and hearing records, and may hold public workshops or hearings to elicit feedback and participation.
The effort is being led by former journalist and Internet entrepreneur Steven Waldman, who recently joined the FCC as senior advisor to Chairman Genachowski, and a working group of experts from throughout the FCC.
Supreme Court Revised Rules
Posted by: | CommentsThe Supreme Court of the United States has adopted a revised version of the Rules of the Court. The revised version will take effect on February 16, 2010. Rule 48 clarifies which version of the Rules applies to documents filed prior to the effective date of the revised Rules.
The revisions to the Rules include a reduction in the number of words allowed for a Reply Brief on the Merits from 7,500 to 6,000. This change restores the volume limit in effect for such briefs prior to the 2007 Rules revisions. Changes to Rules 26 and 34.1 clarify what is to be included on the cover of the Joint Appendix and require that counsel of record include an e-mail address on the cover of every document filed. Additions to Rule 34 require a descriptive index of the appendices and citations to the United States Code whenever available. Rule 37 revisions clarify that only an attorney admitted to practice before this Court is permitted to file an amicus curiae brief and that extensions of time for amicus curiae briefs at the merits stage will not be entertained. There were other minor changes made.
Copies of the revisions are available from the Court’s Public Information Office, the Court’s website, www.supremecourtus.gov, and various legal publishers.
The attached document describes which Rules were revised. The Clerk’s Comments are not part of the Rules, but are fur nished to assist readers in understanding the changes.
SPJ urges Congress to allow open coverage of health care bill discussions
Posted by: | CommentsINDIANAPOLIS – The Society of Professional Journalists sent a letter Jan. 7 that strongly urges House and Senate leaders to open all discussions about the health care bill to the public through the use of C-SPAN and other media. SPJ sent the letter to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader John Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. The letter is below.
C-SPAN initially sent a request to Congressional leaders on Dec. 30, 2009. That request was still in limbo as of Jan. 7, prompting SPJ and numerous media outlets and congressional Republicans to urge access. Click here for a listing of responses to and coverage of the issue.
Following is SPJ’s letter:
Dear Speaker Pelosi:
Representative Boehner:
Senator Reid:
Senator McConnell:
The Society of Professional Journalists strongly urges the House and Senate to reconcile differences between health care bills, including negotiations, conference committee meetings and discussions with the White House, openly. The public trust will be won only through transparency – the live reporting of discussions by C-SPAN and other media.
We realize such negotiations are sensitive and that Congress prefers to conduct negotiations in private to foster frank discussion, but the health-care legislation is too important to the American people to craft in secret. Every day in newspaper editorial pages across the country people from all partisan philosophies are expressing their intense interest in this issue and their hunger for information. They want to see the sausage being made. Legislation developed behind closed doors fuels paranoia, mistrust and contempt by citizens for Congress and the president.
We also see this as an opportunity for Congress to begin doing something that takes place every week in every city in America: openly formulate legislation. Throughout the country, town councils, school boards and other local governing bodies are required by state open meeting laws to hold committee meetings in public – essentially their caucuses and negotiations to formulate legislation. Draft ordinance language is debated for all to see so that citizens can understand how it was developed before it goes to full debate and a vote. Even some state legislatures hold caucus discussions and conference committee meetings openly.
We have heard promises by President Obama and congressional leaders of how the process in this historic revamping of the health care system will be transparent, but televised public forums and floor debates are not enough. The American people want to see the most important part of the process for themselves. Televise the negotiations live and you will embark on a new era of openness, accountability and public trust in America.
Sincerely,
Kevin Smith, President
Society of Professional Journalists
Founded in 1909 as Sigma Delta Chi, SPJ promotes the free flow of information vital to a well-informed citizenry; works to inspire and educate the next generation of journalists; and protects First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and press. For more information about SPJ, please visit www.spj.org.
The Federal Trade Commission is seeking public comment on proposed guidelines that are designed to help Web site operators comply with the FTC’s Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule.
The proposed guidelines were submitted to the FTC by a non-profit organization known as iSAFE, Inc. under a provision aimed at industry self-regulation. This provision allows non-profit groups and companies to request FTC approval of proposed guidelines – known as safe harbor programs – that govern compliance with the Rule.
Web site operators participating in FTC-approved safe harbor programs are subject to the programs’ disciplinary procedures. In cases where the FTC is considering legal action against a Web site operator, the agency takes into account the operator’s response to safe harbor disciplinary procedures.
The Rule requires operators of Web sites that are directed at children under 13 years old and that collect personal information from them – as well as operators of general-audience Web sites that knowingly collect personal information from children under 13 – to notify parents and obtain their consent before collecting, using, or disclosing any such information. Since the Rule took effect on April 21, 2000, four groups – the Children’s Advertising Review Unit of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, the Entertainment Software Rating Board, TrustE and Privo, Inc. – have received Commission approval for their safe harbor programs. In a Federal Register notice to be published shortly, the FTC seeks public comment about the proposed iSAFE guidelines; whether the guidelines provide “the same or greater protections for children” as those contained in the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule; whether the mechanisms used to assess operators’ compliance are effective; whether incentives for operators’ compliance with the guidelines are effective; and whether the guidelines provide adequate means for resolving consumer complaints. The comment period will last for 45 days. iSAFE’s safe harbor application and the public comments received will be posted on the FTC’s Web site at:http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/privacyinitiatives/childrens_shp.html.
NOTE: Publication of this Federal Register notice does not indicate Commission approval of the safe harbor application. The Commission has 180 days to review proposed self-regulatory guidelines and must set forth its conclusions in writing.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,700 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.
Agreements Cost Consumers Billions of Dollars Each Year, Delay Market Entry of Generic Medicines by an Average of 17 Months
Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz and key members of Congress, including Representative Chris Van Hollen, Chairman Bobby Rush, and Representative Mary Jo Kilroy, today renewed their call for legislation that would put an end to anticompetitive patent settlements, which drug manufacturers have been using to keep less-expensive medicines off the market and charge consumers billions of dollars a year in higher drug prices.
Speaking at a joint press conference, Leibowitz said consumers are forced to pay inflated prices or forgo their medication because of these “pay-for-delay” deals, in which brand-name drug makers pay their generic competitors to keep cheaper alternatives off the market. He urged Congress to adopt a provision as part of the health care reform bill to stop pay-for-delay agreements.
“Pay-for-delay deals are a bad prescription for America: when drug companies agree not to compete, consumers lose,” Leibowitz said. “Ending this practice as part of health care reform is one simple, effective, and straightforward way for Congress to help control drug costs.”
In a written statement, FTC Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch said, “As I testified last year before Chairman Rush’s subcommittee, almost all, if not all, reverse payment agreements . . . delay generic competition longer than it might otherwise occur.”
At today’s event, Leibowitz also announced that the FTC staff has issued a new study, entitled “Pay-for-Delay: How Drug Company Pay-Offs Cost Consumers Billions,” that summarizes the savings lost to U.S. consumers during the past six years through such pay-for-delay deals in the drug industry, and found that the number of agreements with payment and delay has increased from zero in 2004 to a record 19 agreements in Fiscal Year 2009.
According to the study, which can be found on the FTC’s Web site athttp://www.ftc.gov/os/2010/01/100112payfordelayrpt.pdf, the cost to consumers from pay-for-delay deals is an estimated $3.5 billion per year – or $35 billion over 10 years. The study also found that settlement deals featuring payments by branded drug firms to a generic competitor kept generics off the market for an average of 17 months longer than agreements that do not include a payment. Most of the agreements reached since 2005 are still in effect, according to the study, and they currently protect at least $20 billion in sales of brand-name drugs from generic competition.
All recent staff reports on pharmaceutical patent settlements, as well as other important information resources, can be found on the FTC’s Web site athttp://www.ftc.gov/opa/reporter/payfordelay.shtm.
Finally, today the FTC posted a new pill-shaped “hot topics” button on its Web site, ftc.gov, called “Pay-for-Delay” that consumers and others can use to get more information about the agency’s work in the area of branded and generic drug competition, including recent cases alleging anticompetitive pay-for-delay drug settlements, speeches on this issue, and related congressional testimony.
The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust@ftc.gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Room 394, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read “Competition Counts” at http://www.ftc.gov/competitioncounts.
New Zealand and the United States have agreed to enhance cooperation in science and technology research to improve the shared capabilities of both nations to protect against acts of terrorism and other threats to domestic and external security.
“International collaboration in science and technology is a major part of our ongoing efforts to counter threats of terrorism,” said Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Janet Napolitano. “This agreement will enhance our ability to collaborate on research and share innovative technologies to ensure our mutual security and protect the public.”
“The Agreement on Science and Technology Cooperation Contributing to Domestic and External Security Capabilities strengthens New Zealand’s longstanding relationship with the U.S. in research science and technology,” said New Zealand Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully. “Under the Agreement New Zealand transport security and civil defense emergency management researchers will now benefit from collaborative project work with their U.S. counterparts.”
The Agreement calls for close cooperation between the US and New Zealand on the development of threat and vulnerability analyses and new technologies, and strengthened collaboration on border and transport security and civil defense emergency management.
The Agreement draws on the collective technical expertise of government scientists from both countries, and encourages robust participation by universities, non-profit organization and the private sector through public-private partnerships and collaborative funding.
It was signed today in Washington by Secretary Napolitano and New Zealand Ambassador Roy Ferguson. The United States has recently concluded similar agreements with Spain, Germany, France, Israel, Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada.
For more information, visit www.dhs.gov.
Choosing and Protecting Passwords
Posted by: | CommentsChoosing and Protecting Passwords
| Passwords are a common form of authentication and are often the only barrier between a user and your personal information. There are several programs attackers can use to help guess or “crack” passwords, but by choosing good passwords and keeping them confidential, you can make it more difficult for an unauthorized person to access your information. |
Why do you need a password?
Think about the number of personal identification numbers (PINs), passwords, or passphrases you use every day: getting money from the ATM or using your debit card in a store, logging on to your computer or email, signing in to an online bank account or shopping cart…the list seems to just keep getting longer. Keeping track of all of the number, letter, and word combinations may be frustrating at times, and maybe you’ve wondered if all of the fuss is worth it. After all, what attacker cares about your personal email account, right? Or why would someone bother with your practically empty bank account when there are others with much more money? Often, an attack is not specifically about your account but about using the access to your information to launch a larger attack. And while having someone gain access to your personal email might not seem like much more than an inconvenience and threat to your privacy, think of the implications of an attacker gaining access to your social security number or your medical records.
One of the best ways to protect information or physical property is to ensure that only authorized people have access to it. Verifying that someone is the person they claim to be is the next step, and this authentication process is even more important, and more difficult, in the cyber world. Passwords are the most common means of authentication, but if you don’t choose good passwords or keep them confidential, they’re almost as ineffective as not having any password at all. Many systems and services have been successfully broken into due to the use of insecure and inadequate passwords, and some viruses and worms have exploited systems by guessing weak passwords.
How do you choose a good password?
Most people use passwords that are based on personal information and are easy to remember. However, that also makes it easier for an attacker to guess or “crack” them. Consider a four-digit PIN number. Is yours a combination of the month, day, or year of your birthday? Or the last four digits of your social security number? Or your address or phone number? Think about how easily it is to find this information out about somebody. What about your email password—is it a word that can be found in the dictionary? If so, it may be susceptible to “dictionary” attacks, which attempt to guess passwords based on words in the dictionary.
Although intentionally misspelling a word (”daytt” instead of “date”) may offer some protection against dictionary attacks, an even better method is to rely on a series of words and use memory techniques, or mnemonics, to help you remember how to decode it. For example, instead of the password “hoops,” use “IlTpbb” for “[I] [l]ike [T]o [p]lay [b]asket[b]all.” Using both lowercase and capital letters adds another layer of obscurity. Your best defense, though, is to use a combination of numbers, special characters, and both lowercase and capital letters. Change the same example we used above to “Il!2pBb.” and see how much more complicated it has become just by adding numbers and special characters.
Longer passwords are more secure than shorter ones because there are more characters to guess, so consider using passphrases when you can. For example, “This passwd is 4 my email!” would be a strong password because it has many characters and includes lowercase and capital letters, numbers, and special characters. You may need to try different variations of a passphrase—many applications limit the length of passwords, and some do not accept spaces. Avoid common phrases, famous quotations, and song lyrics.
Don’t assume that now that you’ve developed a strong password you should use it for every system or program you log into. If an attacker does guess it, he would have access to all of your accounts. You should use these techniques to develop unique passwords for each of your accounts.
Here is a review of tactics to use when choosing a password:
- Don’t use passwords that are based on personal information that can be easily accessed or guessed.
- Don’t use words that can be found in any dictionary of any language.
- Develop a mnemonic for remembering complex passwords.
- Use both lowercase and capital letters.
- Use a combination of letters, numbers, and special characters.
- Use passphrases when you can.
- Use different passwords on different systems.
How can you protect your password?
Now that you’ve chosen a password that’s difficult to guess, you have to make sure not to leave it someplace for people to find. Writing it down and leaving it in your desk, next to your computer, or, worse, taped to your computer, is just making it easy for someone who has physical access to your office. Don’t tell anyone your passwords, and watch for attackers trying to trick you through phone calls or email messages requesting that you reveal your passwords (see Avoiding Social Engineering and Phishing Attacks for more information).
If your internet service provider (ISP) offers choices of authentication systems, look for ones that use Kerberos, challenge/response, or public key encryption rather than simple passwords (see Understanding ISPs and Supplementing Passwords for more information). Consider challenging service providers that only use passwords to adopt more secure methods.
Also, many programs offer the option of “remembering” your password, but these programs have varying degrees of security protecting that information. Some programs, such as email clients, store the information in clear text in a file on your computer. This means that anyone with access to your computer can discover all of your passwords and can gain access to your information. For this reason, always remember to log out when you are using a public computer (at the library, an internet cafe, or even a shared computer at your office). Other programs, such as Apple’s Keychain and Palm’s Secure Desktop, use strong encryption to protect the information. These types of programs may be viable options for managing your passwords if you find you have too many to remember.
There’s no guarantee that these techniques will prevent an attacker from learning your password, but they will make it more difficult.
Authors: Mindi McDowell, Jason Rafail, Shawn Hernan Original work published on us-cert.gov
Continue Reading HERE
Current CyberSecurity Legislation
Posted by: | CommentsSenate Bills 773, the draft Cybersecurity Act of 2009 in the US Congress, and S.778 illustrate the current policy directions under consideration and of concern to stakeholders. S.773 proposes to “ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption ….”
In addition, S.773 proposes to “ensure the continued free flow of commerce in part by providing a “cadre of information technology specialists” to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses via standards to be developed by the US National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) and to “enforce compliance” by “software manufacturers, distributors, and vendors” with “a national licensing, certification, and periodic recertification program for cybersecurity professionals” making it “unlawful to provide cybersecurity” to critical US infrastructure without such certification and without yet indicating which infrastructures are to be designated as critical.
S.773 and 778 are two of the dozen legislative actions directly or indirectly shaping cybersecurity policy that currently are being deliberated by the US Congress in some sense to strategically rebalance public-private partnerships and related equities for the CEO. The Global Cybersecurity Policy Guidebook to be provided to the participants will include summaries of the related legislation with URL pointers and appendices to analyses of these policies by the Government and independent advocacy organizations.
