People find data difficult to own – and things we don't own, we tend not to protect.
Paradoxically, it is only when I disappear into the digital crowd that my personal data becomes interesting for digital merchants.
Remote cameras used to track wildlife in Australia could pose a privacy risk, especially if the images they capture fall into the wrong hands.
Privacy rules enacted in Europe are affecting companies – and their customers and users – all around the world.
Imagine if we could specify our general privacy preferences in our devices, have them check privacy policies when we sign up for apps, and warn us if the agreements overstep.
Researchers analyze social media data to gain useful insights into modern society and culture. But it's important to protect users' privacy. How can both ends meet?
As CCTV cameras become more widespread, it's becoming more difficult for people to protect their locational privacy in public.
By choosing to deal with companies with better data protection policies, Australian consumers can create pressure for change in how personal data is handled across the board.
Small charities aren't like small companies, and the way they operate may pose greater risks under GDPR than for others.
Organisations are on the losing side, especially those that rely on leveraging personal data to compete. But there will be a net benefit to consumers – and that's a good thing.
Everything you wanted to know but were scared to ask about... the General Data Protection Regulation (coming to a country near you).
We need to stop blaming consumers for not reading online privacy policies and fix the system.
It is vital for governments and citizens to discuss how much privacy should be sacrificed when issues of national security arise.
The routine gathering and monetisation of vast amounts of personal data has been normalised.
Australian businesses will not be forced to comply with or fall foul of the new data regulation merely because they maintain websites accessible in the EU.
Our ability to reconstruct physical features from DNA is advancing, but can we ensure the privacy of "anonymised" genetic data if we can predict the face of its owner?
Words matter – not just for building trust and understanding, but for weighing up legal issues. So maybe "open" and "shared" aren't the right words to use when we refer to our data.
When you send off a cheek swab to one of the private genome companies, you may sacrifice not just your own privacy but that of your family and your ancestors.
An expert explains how Facebook's privacy issues are linked to a bigger problem – a 'hostile information architecture,' largely controlled by corporate interests.
The internet developed as a place for open collaboration; there are technical limits on its transformation into a commercial marketplace.