A collection of discussions, links, stories, news and whatever else I find interesting in the fields of computing, information, science, privacy, semantics, mathematics and so on...
Connected Health cluster presents a practical seminar to help health IT developers and startups plan and manage smoothly their products to comply with needed standards and rules.
9:00 What is a software as a medical device and what is required to get regulatory compliant products on the market - overview of medical device software safety, regulations in EU and US, standards and FDA guidance - Dr. Marion Lepmets, Co-Founder & CEO of SoftComply – 30 min presentation + 15 min Q&A
9:45Privacy Engineering and Health Data: IT and IoT - Dr. Ian Oliver, Security Specialist at Bell Labs – 30 min presentation + 15 min Q&A
I'm at CrIM'16 at the moment listening to an excellent lecture on IoT security and privacy by Prof. Sokratis Katsikas of NTNU. He used this quote from Bruce Schneier:
If you think that technology can solve your security problems, then you don't understand the
problems and you don't understand the technology.
A small discussion resulted in this variation
If you think you think a 3euro bottle of water bought after airport security reduces the risk of terrorism then you don't understand security.
What they do is project a "soothing picture" onto the wall or ceiling at night - ostensibly to help your child sleep. What struck me was the similarly in their design to a surveillance camera, so I guess there's no better time that early childhood to start preparing your child to be oblivious to such devices in everyday life.
Remember, total surveillance is for your safety and security...
The moral of this part of the story is that if you produce some
compact politicised ideology (manifesto) consisting of principles and
rules there will be unintended consequences. Success creates a religion
or cult, and defeat is being ignored. No such doctrine is perfect.
Thinking you will change the world with a manifesto is naive, and if
you succeed you may not have improved the world.
To me, given the problems that Privacy by Design has caused with privacy officers believing in some mythical "compliance" without any consideration of the software engineering or cultural aspects of developing information systems, this sums it up quite nicely!
The Independent is running a story today: Brussels attacks: Security officials accused of missing a string of opportunities to stop suicide bombers Accomplices still on the run after day of conflicting reports and confusion
The following paragraphs are deeply troubling given the emphasis on "banning" encryption and the need for total surveillance:
The French Prime Minister, Manuel Valls, who laid a wreath at the underground station close to the European Commission headquarters where more than 20 people died, said that EU nations had to invest “massively” in their security systems.
The most direct criticism came from Turkey, which has previously criticised France for what it said was a failure to heed a prior warning about one of the suicide attackers involved in last year’s attack in Paris in which 130 people were killed.
Turkish officials have previously said that French authorities were warned twice by Turkey about one of the assailants in the attacks on Paris in November. A senior government source told The Independent: “We had warned France before the Paris attacks, now this. It’s ridiculous.”
The two brothers had been known to police in Belgium for years, and operated in some of the marginalised communities in the capital that had avoided close attention from the intelligence agencies despite problems of jihadist recruitment and terrorist links.
The Belgian federal prosecutor, Frederic van Leeuw, told reporters that the two brothers, Brussels-born Belgian citizens, had “extensive” criminal records but they were not related to terrorism.
So, ultimately the failure was both of communication between intelligence and police agencies *and* a failure to listen. Worse is that the terrorists involved were already known (last paragraph above). If the signals of possible trouble were not seen in the above then the problem certainly does not lie with extensive data collection. In fact the perpetrators actually gained privacy by effectively hiding in plain sight.
The trouble is that now politicians are in the "do something" mode of operation, where doing anything, regardless of effectiveness, is far better than actually thinking and doing the right thing.
I had the pleasure of speaking with some security experts in counter-terrorism a while back. They effectively said that politicians want more security just to be seen to be doing something - this is why we've ended up with airport security that concentrates on bottles of water but not on mitigating the real risks - queues, delays, bottlenecks. The question of profiling, as seen in Israeli aviation security is too much for the politicians to risk their careers on so everyone will suffer under increasingly intrusive and increasingly ineffective security.
Finally this quote by Simon Jenkins of The Guardian:
Those who live under freedom know it demands a price, which is a degree of risk. We pay the state to protect us – but calmly, without constant boasting or fearmongering. We know that, in reality, life in Britain has never been safer. That it suits some people to pretend otherwise does not alter the fact.
In his admiral manual, Terrorism: How to Respond, the Belfast academic Richard English defines the threat to democracy as not the “limited danger” of death and destruction. It is the danger “of provoking ill-judged, extravagant and counterproductive state responses”.
We all know that BigData is good and that more data is better. In fact if you could collect everything then you could potentially stop all crimes, stop terrorism, save the World, freedom, puppies...literally do anything and everything!
Except, as most organisations should have realised (ordinary businesses take note!!) that having huge amounts of data doesn't really help you if you have no idea of what you have, what it means and how to actually extract the data you want.
Its worse when you have so much that even running the queries that might extract the right piece of data becomes so complex that you may as well just give up.
Pity the NSA then:
http://www.zdnet.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-overwhelmed-with-data-ineffective/ NSA is so overwhelmed with data, it's no longer effective, says whistleblower
One of the agency's first whistleblowers says the NSA is taking in too much data for it to handle, which can have disastrous -- if not deadly -- consequences.
So, we have a paradox in the sense that the more data we get the better we can hide...
Its funny but about 2 years ago there was an idea called the "Slow Data Movement" whose aim was to save the World from BigData madness but concentrating on what you actually need...
In fact we've even heard the argument that mass surveillance is no where as effective as "good old fashioned police work".
In fact, it even seems that the recent attacks in Belgium relied upon unencrypted communications ... which should have been easily spotable, unless of course you've got politicians obsessed with the evils of encryption and too much data to even see the weak signals of ordinary, unencrypted data.
As many discussions on this blog have pointed out, there is a mismatch between engineering and legal when it comes to privacy; one can even argue there's a mismatch between these two groups and privacy advocates too, but that's another story...
It is critical for anyone involved in privacy to understand that without the complete trust and involvement of the engineers who build the systems that are supposed to be compliant with whatever privacy policy exists, that compliance will be at best, fragile.
At the IAPP's DPIntensive meeting earlier this year I gave a presentation on the subject, here's the link to the slides.
The main learning is that unless engineering is an equal part in your privacy discussions then you're really just playing at compliance.
Privacy isn't just about privacy policies or long winded legal documents but about education, learning and understanding that everyone depends upon everyone else in order for your business to successfully (and legally!) function.
It often surprises me that many of the people advocating privacy don't
actually understand the things that they're trying to keep private,
specifically information. Indeed the terms data and information are used
interchangeably and there is often little understanding of the actual
nature and semantics of said, data and information.
This is also seen in how we train our staff in privacy aspects - with the dreaded "privacy awareness training":
One thing that came up was the need for training and that privacy
awareness training hasn't had the effect hoped for. Given that awareness
training is exactly that, is it no surprise that once the, usually, one
hour presentation on how we should all care about privacy is made
nothing happens?
Actually, everyone is acutely aware of privacy in the first place and privacy awareness training rapidly becomes an exercise in CYA - as security expert Bruce Schneier might have put it - and have no effect whatsoever on the overall quality of development, customer privacy and company culture.
I guess we're still pretty naive about privacy and unless we have a cultural change this naivety will come back to haunt us for a very, very long time with some awful business repercussions.
Deadline for abstract submission: 18 January 2016 Deadline for paper submission: 8 February 2016 Notification of acceptance: 22 February 2016 Accepted paper camera-ready: 3 March 2016
************************************************************ We are pleased to invite you to participate in the Second International Workshop on Privacy Engineering (IWPE'16).
Privacy engineering research has never been a more timely endeavor. Ongoing news reports regarding global surveillance programs, massive personal data breaches in corporate databases, and notorious examples of personal tragedies due to privacy violations have intensified societal demands for privacy-friendly systems. In response, current legislative and standardization processes worldwide are seeking to strengthen individuals’ privacy by introducing legal and organizational frameworks that personal data collectors and processors must follow. As a result, engineers are increasingly expected to build and maintain systems that preserve privacy and comply with data protection standards in different ICT domains (such as health, energy, transportation, social computing, law enforcement, and public services) and on different infrastructures and architectures (such as cloud, grid, or mobile computing).
Although there is a consensus on the benefits of an engineering approach to privacy, few concrete proposals exist for models, methodologies, techniques and tools to support engineers and organizations in this endeavor. Work that focuses on helping organizations and software developers to identify and adopt appropriate privacy engineering methods, techniques and tools in their daily practices is also missing. Furthermore, it is difficult to systematically evaluate whether the systems developed using privacy engineering methodologies comply with legal frameworks, provide necessary technical assurances, and fulfill users’ privacy requirements.
Clearly, more research is needed in developing methods that can help translate legal and normative concepts, as well as user expectations, into systems requirements. There is also a growing need for techniques and tools to support organizations and engineers in developing and maintaining (socio-)technical systems that meet these requirements. In an effort to close the gaps in research, the topics of IWPE'16 include all aspects of privacy engineering, ranging from its theoretical foundations, engineering approaches and support infrastructures to its practical application in projects of different scales.
Specifically, we are seeking the following kinds of papers:
technical solution papers that illustrate a novel formalism, method or other research finding with preliminary evaluation;
experience and practice papers that describe a case study, challenge or lessons learned in a specific domain;
early evaluations of tools and techniques that support engineering tasks in privacy requirements, design, implementation, testing, etc.;
interdisciplinary studies or critical reviews of existing privacy engineering concepts, methods and frameworks;
vision papers that take a clear position informed by evidence based on a thorough literature review.
IWPE’16 welcomes papers that focus on novel solutions based on recent developments in privacy engineering. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:
Integrating law and policy compliance into the development process
Privacy impact assessment during software development
Privacy risk management models
Privacy breach recovery methods
Technical standards, heuristics and best practices for privacy engineering
Privacy engineering in technical standards
Privacy requirements elicitation and analysis methods
User privacy and data protection requirements
Management of privacy requirements with other system requirements
Privacy requirements implementation
Privacy engineering strategies and design patterns
Privacy-preserving architectures
Privacy engineering and databases
Privacy engineering in the context of interaction design and usability
Privacy testing and evaluation methods
Validation and verification of privacy requirements
Engineering of Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs)
Integration of PETs into systems
Models and approaches for the verification of privacy properties
Tools and formal languages supporting privacy engineering
Teaching and training privacy engineering
Adaptations of privacy engineering into specific software development processes
Pilots and real-world applications
Evaluation of privacy engineering methods, technologies and tools
Privacy engineering and accountability
Organizational, legal, political and economic aspects of privacy engineering
This topic list is not meant to be exhaustive, as IWPE'16 is interested in all aspects of privacy engineering. However, to screen out off-topic papers early in the review process, we request authors to submit an abstract prior to their paper submission. Abstracts of papers without a clear application to privacy engineering will be considered outside the scope of this workshop and may be rejected.
We solicit unpublished short position papers (up to 4 pages) and long papers reporting technical, research or industry experience (up to 8 pages) on all dimensions of the privacy engineering domain. Each paper, written in English, must follow IEEE Proceedings format. Submission of a paper should be regarded as a commitment that, should the paper be accepted, at least one of the authors will attend the workshop to present the paper.
Abstracts and papers must be submitted via EasyChair
All IWPE'16 Papers will be published in IEEE eXplore, which is indexed by EI Engineering Index, ISI Conference Proceedings Citation Index (CPCI-S), Scopus, etc.
This is an interesting development: a reintroduction of an "historical" technique to ostensibly address a problem introduced by a technology to make things simple(r).
The same techniques guided ancient Polynesians in the open Pacific and led Sir Ernest Shackleton to remote Antarctica, then oriented astronauts when Apollo 12 was disabled by lightning - the techniques of celestial navigation.
A glimmer of the old lore has returned to the Naval Academy.
Officials reinstated brief lessons in celestial navigation this year, nearly two decades after the full class was determined outdated and cut from the curriculum.
That decision, in the late 1990s, made national news and caused a stir among the old guard of navigators.
Maritime nostalgia, however, isn't behind the return.
Rather, the escalating threat of cyberattacks has led the Navy to dust off its tools to measure the angles of stars.
Putting the political aspects of the GPS system aside, it is a single point of failure for navigation, at least until Galileo and GLONASS are properly supported by navigation devices. Furthermore, as the article mentions, the GPS system is open to attack from various vectors. The use of "legacy" (I love that word - It doesn't mean obsolete!) technologies such as the sextant address many of these issues.
For me the main thing here is that the sextant forces understanding of navigation - quite literally how coordinates are calculated which is something missing from GPS.
In other words, don't rely upon technology, or if you do, you'd better know how to drop back a level of automation...sounds familiar...it is the basic premise of the 'Children of the Magenta' talk by American Airlines (see here for an earlier blog posting, the video might be available on YouTube somewhere).
This is very kind of Google...providing you with an automatically generated privacy notice to European customers as detailed on the Blogger settings page:
This to me highlights a few problems with privacy laws and compliance:
Firstly, you have to understand EU privacy laws
You have to understand how to write such a notice
You have to understand what systems such as Google Analytics etc actually collect and process.
You might have to provide an opt-out mechanism such as Google's Analytics Opt-Out.
For 99.999% of bloggers (+/- a few %age points), I strongly doubt that any of this is understood or even known about at all.
So while Google might come in for some criticism for its dominance in the information gathering domain, they at least try to make things easier for their customers.
Then there's the EU Cookie Consent Kit which guides you through at least one part of the consent notice maze.
As an exercise, write a simple website...now work out what privacy notice you should display. Just to make it interesting, you are not allowed to have any contact with a privacy lawyer nor anyone who has a detailed knowledge about such things.
This quote by Einstein (often misattributed to Feynmann) sums up privacy laws and the average person writing a blog:
You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother
Our privacy laws have become so complicated and often so misaligned with technology that they can not be easily understood by the average Internet user.
So, I found out recently that coffee might kill you. Seriously, it is a dangerous substance - almost as dangerous as a 110ml bottle of water is to your safety on an aircraft (but a 1 litre bottle of something alcoholic bought at duty free isn't) - and here's the proof (seen in a Starbucks in San Jose, CA):
Proposition 65 Warning Notice: "Coffee Might Kill You"
I'm not actually sure whether that has stopped anyone from buying coffee (or tea for that matter), ever. I suppose you could switch to that decaf muck, but you're probably going to die of something equally horrible then too.
I guess some lawyers and/or politicians need to cover their asses...
There is a fast on-going change
in the technical architectures and topologies of the Internet: in the
near future 5G and next generation 4G/LTE network architectures will be
based on or migrated to Software Defined Networking (SDN) and Network
Functions Virtualization (NFV). These create new virtual network
elements each affecting the logic of the network operation, traffic
management and introducing new and novel security challenges. Aspects
such as security of orchestration, management functionality as well as
surveillance and privacy are brought to the fore. At the same time they
introduce new ways of dealing with attack prevention, management and
recovery. The one-day workshop will consist
of papers, presentations and demonstrations on the subject of advanced
network security. While primarily related to 5G networks, experiences
from 4G/LTE, 3G and earlier, including case studies on practicalities of
known attacks and novel attack vectors will be considered for
acceptance. An invited keynote speech will be given setting out the
overall area of security in network development and operations.
IW5GS Programme TrustCom 2015 Helsinki, Finland Friday 21, August 2015
10h05-11h50 – Session I
Ian Oliver, Silke Holtmanns, Workshop Opening
Günther Horn and Peter Schneider, Towards 5G Security
Siddharth Prakash Rao, Silke Holtmanns, Ian Oliver and Tuomas Aura. Unblocking stolen mobile devices using SS7-MAP vulnerabilities
Vikramajeet Khatri and Joerg Abendroth, Mobile Guard Demo - Network Based Malware Detection
13h10-14h55 – Session II
Ian Oliver, Aspects of 5G Security
Nicolae Paladi and Christian Gehrmann. Towards Secure SDN-based Multi-tenant Virtualized Networks
Elena Dubrova, Mats Näslund and Göran Selander. CRC-Based Message Authentication for 5G Mobile Technology
Prajwol Kumar Nakarmi, Oscar Ohlsson and Michael Liljenstam. An Air Interface Signaling Protection Function for Mobile Networks: GSM Experiments and Beyond
15h15-17h00 – Session III
Bengt Shalin, keynote talk
Mingjun Wang and Zheng Yan. Security in D2D Communications: A Review
Karl Norrman, Mats Näslund, Bengt Sahlin and Jari Arkko. A USIM compatible 5G AKA protocol with perfect forward secrecy
The 1st International Workshop on 5G Security held in
conjunction with IEEE TrustCom-15
August 20-22, 2015, Helsinki, Finland
There is a fast on-going change in the technical architectures and topologies
of the Internet: in the near future 5G and next generation 4G/LTE network
architectures will be based on or migrated to Software Defined Networking (SDN)
and Network Functions Virtualization (NFV). These create new virtual network
elements each affecting the logic of the network operation, traffic management
and introducing new and novel security challenges. Aspects such as security of
orchestration, management functionality as well as surveillance and privacy are
brought to the fore. At the same time they introduce new ways of dealing with
attack prevention, management and recovery.
The one-day workshop will consist of papers, presentations and demonstrations
on the subject of advanced network security. While primarily related to 5G
networks, experiences from 4G/LTE, 3G and earlier, including case studies on
practicalities of known attacks and novel attack vectors will be considered for
acceptance. An invited keynote speech will be given setting out the overall area
of security in network development and operations.
Scope and Interests We solicit papers and demonstrations in the
following areas related to 5G/LTE security:
Core Network Security
Cellular security
Device to Device (D2D)
Security Management and Orchestration of NFV and SDN elements
Terminal and Edge Computing Security
Malware and attack detection and prevention techniques, eg: machine
learning
Authentication and Authorisation
Encryption protocols, eg: homomorphic encryption
Key Exchange, Storage and Protection
Content/Semantic processing, inc. anonymisation of (meta*-) data
Honeypot and Firewall Technologies
Protocol security: Diameter, SS7, BGP, etc
Physical Layer Security
Formal Specification and Analysis of Protocols and Attacks, eg: model
checking etc.
Trusted Computing with NFV and SDN
Submission and Publication Information
TBA
Important Dates
Submission deadline: March 31, 2015 Authors notification: May 31,
2015 Camera-ready due: July 1, 2015 Registration: July 1, 2015
Program Co-Chairs
Dr. Ian Oliver, Nokia, Finland Dr. Silke Holtmanns, Nokia, Finland
Program Committee
Dr. Rolf Blom (Security Researcher), SICS Security Lab, Sweden Dr. Aidan
Delaney, University of Brighton, UK Tobias Engel (Security Expert),
Sternraute, Germany (tbc) Hannu Flinck (Senior Specialist in Internet
Technologies), Nokia Networks, Finland Dr. Martin Gerdes (Ph.D. Fellow),
University of Agdar, Norway Dr. Philip Ginzboorg (Senior Researcher), Huawei,
Finland Leo Hippalainen (Security Expert), Nokia Networks, Finland Prof.
John Howse, University of Brighton, UK Prof. Theo Kanter, University of
Stockholm, Sweden Dr. Kari Kostiainen (Researcher), ETH Zürich,
Switzerland Dr. Ulrike Meyer (Security Expert), RWTH Aachen, Germany Prof.
Chris Mitchell, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK Markus Miettinen
(Research Assistant), University of Darmstadt, Germany Dr. Martin Otto (Head
of Cyber Security Research), Siemens AG, Germany Dr. Anand Prasant (3GPP
Security Chair), NEC, Japan Peter Schneider (Senior Specialist Security
Solutions), Nokia Networks, Germany Prof. Taleb Tirak, Aalto University,
Finland Prof. Ralf Tönjes, University of Applied Science, Osnabrueck,
Germany Janne Uusilehto (Head of Security and Privacy), Microsoft Mobile,
Finland Prof. Thanh van Do, Telenor, Norway Prof. Alf Zugenmaier, Munich
University of Applied Science, Germany
With the rapid development and increasing complexity of computer systems and communication networks, user requirements for trust, security and privacy are becoming more and more demanding. Therefore, there is a grand challenge that traditional security technologies and measures may not meet user requirements in open, dynamic, heterogeneous, mobile, wireless, and distributed computing environments. As a result, we need to build systems and networks in which various applications allow users to enjoy more comprehensive services while preserving trust, security and privacy at the same time. As useful and innovative technologies, trusted computing and communications are attracting researchers with more and more attention.
The 14th IEEE International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (IEEE TrustCom-15) will be held in Helsinki, Finland on 20-22 August 2015. The conference aims at bringing together researchers and practitioners in the world working on trusted computing and communications, with regard to trust, security, privacy, reliability, dependability, survivability, availability, and fault tolerance aspects of computer systems and networks, and providing a forum to present and discuss emerging ideas and trends in this highly challenging research field.
Accepted and presented papers will be included in the IEEE CPS Proceedings. Distinguished papers presented at the conference, after further revision, will be recommended to high quality international journals.
IMPORTANT DATES:
Deadline of paper submission: 23 January, 2015
Notification of acceptance: 16 February, 2015
Accepted Paper camera ready: 3 March, 2015
We are pleased to invite you to participate in the premier annual event of the International Workshop on Privacy Engineering (IWPE'15).
Ongoing news reports regarding global surveillance programs, massive personal data breaches in corporate databases, and notorious examples of personal tragedies due to privacy violations have intensified societal demands for privacy-friendly systems. In response, current legislative and standardization processes worldwide aim to strengthen individual’s privacy by introducing legal and organizational frameworks that personal data collectors and processors must follow.
However, in practice, these initiatives alone are not enough to guarantee that organizations and software developers will be able to identify and adopt appropriate privacy engineering techniques in their daily practices. Even if so, it is difficult to systematically evaluate whether the systems they develop using such techniques comply with legal frameworks, provide necessary technical assurances, and fulfill users’ privacy requirements. It is evident that research is needed in developing techniques that can aid the translation of legal and normative concepts, as well as user expectations into systems requirements. Furthermore, methods that can support organizations and engineers in developing (socio-)technical systems that address these requirements is of increasing value to respond to the existing societal challenges associated with privacy.
In this context, privacy engineering research is emerging as an important topic. Engineers are increasingly expected to build and maintain privacy-preserving and data-protection compliant systems in different ICT domains such as health, energy, transportation, social computing, law enforcement, public services; based on different infrastructures such as cloud, grid, or mobile computing and architectures. While there is a consensus on the benefits of an engineering approach to privacy, concrete proposals for processes, models, methodologies, techniques and tools that support engineers and organizations in this endeavor are few and in need of immediate attention.
To cover this gap, the topics of the International Workshop on Privacy Engineering (IWPE'15) focus on all the aspects surrounding privacy engineering, ranging from its theoretical foundations, engineering approaches, and support infrastructures, to its practical application in projects of different scale. Specifically, we are seeking the following kinds of papers: (1) technical solution papers that illustrate a novel formalism, method or other research finding with preliminary evaluation; (2) experience and practice papers that describe a case study, challenge or lessons learned from in a specific domain; (3) early evaluations of tools and other infrastructure that support engineering tasks in privacy requirements, design, implementation, testing, etc.; (4) interdisciplinary studies or critical reviews of existing privacy engineering concepts, methods and frameworks; or (5) vision papers that take a clear position informed by evidence based on a thorough literature review.
IWPE’15 welcomes papers that focus on novel solutions on the recent developments in the general area of privacy engineering. Topics of interests include, but are not limited to:
Integration of law and policy compliance into the development process
Privacy impact assessment
Privacy risk management models
Privacy breach recovery Methods
Technical standards, heuristics and best practices for privacy engineering
Privacy engineering in technical standards
Privacy requirements elicitation and analysis methods
User privacy and data protection requirements
Management of privacy requirements with other system requirements
Privacy requirements operationalization
Privacy engineering strategies and design patterns
Privacy architectures
Privacy engineering and databases
Privacy engineering in the context of interaction design and usability
Privacy testing and evaluation methods
Validation and verification of privacy requirements
Engineering Privacy Enhancing Technologies
Models and approaches for the verification of privacy properties
Tools supporting privacy engineering
Teaching and training privacy engineering
Adaptations of privacy engineering into specific software development processes
Pilots and real-world applications
Privacy engineering and accountability
Organizational, legal, political and economic aspects of privacy engineering
This topic list is not meant to be exhaustive; since IWPE'15 is interested in all aspects of privacy engineering. However, papers without a clear application to privacy engineering will be considered out of scope and may be rejected without full review.
PAPER FORMAT & SUBMISSION
We solicit unpublished short position papers (up to 4 pages) and long papers reporting technical, research or industry experience (up to 8 pages) on all dimensions of the privacy engineering domain. Each paper, written in English, must follow IEEE Proceedings format. Submission of a paper should be regarded as an undertaking that, should the paper be accepted, at least one of the authors will attend the workshop to present the paper. All papers must be submitted via EasyChair at https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=iwpe15
All IWPE'15 Papers will be published in IEEE eXplore, which is indexed by EI Engineering Index, ISI Conference Proceedings Citation Index (CPCI-S), Scopus etc.
If you have any questions regarding IWPE'15, please contact:
Jose M. del Alamo (jm.delalamo@upm.es)
Norman Sadeh (sadeh@cs.cmu.edu)
Seda Gurses (seda@nyu.edu)
Dawn Jutla (dawn.jutla@smu.ca)
No one is really sure who said what and the air is full of denials and the Nuremberg Defense, but it seems like Finland is trying to suppress the word "wisky", or more specifically the Finnish "viski" just in case it corrupt, well, everyone....just think of the children...or maybe it is for my safety and security...but even if it saves just one person...
Organisers of a beer and whisky fair in Helsinki have been granted a license on condition that search engines do not link to the event’s website when users search for “whisky”, according to a report in Helsingin Sanomat. The officials have also asked the beer and whisky fair to remove the word “whisky” from their logo and the event’s official name.
Anyway Finnish taxes being put to work by our elected and unelected officials...good thing there's nothing else to worry about such as the economy, jobs, overly high taxation, food prices, energy prices, energy dependence, flying squirrels, child benefit reductions hirvikarpaset and a government that wants to avoid all hard decisions at all costs.
After all, banning words, moving kunta boundaries and pay rises of 6000 euros per month are far more important than the people of Finland.
"FACEBOOK can send SMS messages on your phone, record your photos and track your location. The National Security Agency is reading your emails. Cyber criminals are trying to snatch your credit card details. In an era where we are rapidly losing all privacy online there is a demand by consumers to protect and control their personal information. As this demand grows, Finland has an opportunity to become the global leader in privacy and information security..."
