It is not easy to set rules on internet use for children when the parents themselves are not aware of the dangers of irresponsible internet use. Parents should first teach themselves about the internet’s benefits and dangers when it comes to their children. Through this education, they can appropriately set clear and doable rules for their children’s internet activities. It is a must that children are aware of the limits on the kinds of sites that they could visit, online etiquette, duration of internet use, information that can be shared online, etc.

All of my four children are frequently using the internet. I have three teenage girls, aged 14 to 18, who use it mainly for research and for social networking. The youngest, an 11-year old boy, enjoys playing games on social media sites. Their first exposure to the online community was about four or five years ago. That was when our family had, for the first time, access to the internet via dial-up. They were very curious at first, and then later, they discovered the benefits of doing research on line and the thrill of social networking.

It was to our family’s benefit that I was exposed to the internet before my children. It gave me enough knowledge about how to manage their online activities. I can say that the most difficult area of control among my children is for them to set limits on their time of use. As with a majority of children, social networking and online gaming can be addicting. Once they are hooked on these, it is very hard for them to stop.

Have you entered into the social media craze without having second thoughts about sharing your personal information? Maybe you have been doing it for five or seven years. Well, there might be some not-so-good news. If you are a prospective employee, online mistakes might compromise your chances of getting a job. Your social media footprints could turn against you and it could hurt a lot. If you think it is clean up time, then go do it!

Does this sound like another privacy issue? Well, as expected, there was a lot of media attention because of this. Those who heard about it were scared that their past social media activities could work against them. There were many speculations here and there, but at least two among those were wrong. The buzz circled around the FTC’s giving the OK to a company to run background checks of applicants using their internet and social media histories.

Without the applicants’ knowledge or consent, a background check would be done before hiring. Through the FTC-authorized company, employers can request a background check report of their job applicants. The report is either “PASSED” or “FAILED”, based on an applicant’s internet and social media history. The use of social media files triggered the privacy issue. Earlier reports had it that the authorized company stores seven years’ worth of social media data. Of course this has caused much speculation. Contrary to this, however, the search only looks at up to seven years of the applicant’s history and nothing is stored.

The U.S. government’s effort to reduce illegal immigration and employment has generated yet another privacy issue. A bill that would force employers to have new employees go through the E-Verify system is now in the making. Different privacy groups reacted against this proposed legislation. The ACLU, EFF, and other civil liberties, labor and privacy groups have openly opposed the Legal Workforce Act of 2011.

The E-Verify system is a kind of employment eligibility verification that is internet-based. Its proponents describe it as a system that will screen those who seek employment in the U.S., which will make it simple for the government to identify illegal immigrants. It will guarantee employers that they only employ those who are lawfully qualified to get a job in the U.S.

Employers who refuse to use E-Verify face penalties of up to $25,000 and imprisonment of at least one year. Upon hiring, the law would require that employers compare their employees’ records in the DHS and SSA databases with the information that these employees supply. Comparison of Social Security numbers provided by the new hires with those on record will also be done. In addition, the proposed bill will require employers to obtain the fingerprints of employees as a pilot biometric authentication program.

SafeKids.com was created to calm your fears about internet safety and to provide advice on how children can avoid dangers while online. Among the many internet safety sites, SafeKids.com is one of the oldest. Since its creation, it has built good relationships between parents and children regarding online experiences. Parents can use the information contained on its pages in order to keep their kids safe on the internet.

Larry Magid, a technology journalist, created and founded this very helpful site. His 1994 brochure “Child Safety on the Information Highway” is just one of his outstanding works and contributions. He has written useful, online safety articles that have helped parents keep their child’s online activities relatively safe.

Parents look at online safety of children as one of the issues that they have to address. Luckily, SafeKids.com focuses on this concern, and considers parents as its main clients since parents worry more about internet safety than do their children. The fear felt by parents inspired the site creator to provide them with articles that give good advice on safe surfing. These articles deal with safe search, safety tools, safety guides, social networking privacy tools, and more.

Agents of the F.B.I. will soon be given more latitude to search the lives of those people who attract their attention. They can use the new powers to search databases or go through household trash. A surveillance team can also be used to look into the lives of people who behave abnormally. These changes will form part of the Bureau’s new manual called the Domestic Investigation and Operations Guide.

The new rules will enable F.B.I. agents to act with a greater degree of “freedom” to anticipate any criminal or terrorist activity. Additional authority will empower them to investigate people. At the back of these changes are some unfavorable reactions of concerned individuals, especially those who advocate privacy. One of them said that with the lessening of restrictions on agents’ powers was a risky decision. Some agents might use intrusive techniques even for those persons who are actually innocent. Abuses have occurred in the past, and can still occur. Problems regarding “national security letters” that allowed agents to obtain information without a court order were hot issues before.

To defend the F.B.I.’s action, a counsel said that previous problems involving national security letters have already been fixed and would not recur. There was an explanation regarding it, stating that changes in the Bureau’s manual do not require any consent. Sufficient studies were made concerning the risks and the benefits brought about by the changes. The counsel further stated that there was only fine tuning of the rules, and no major changes were made.

Recent incidents of medical record breaches are proof that it is difficult to completely put up a foolproof system for safekeeping this data. A large number of people’s personal medical records were stolen while under the custody of a record management company. In March of this year, nearly two million owners of personal information managed by a provider were informed that their records could not be located. Whether stolen or compromised, breaches against health records pose danger to the privacy of hundreds of millions of people.

The patient’s medical records should be handled with utmost care so as to preserve their confidentiality. These documents contain sensitive, personal information that spells out the owner’s privacy. Because of this, those who are found to commit breaches should face the consequences. Just last March, a general hospital in the U.S. was fined $1 million for its employee’s negligence. Paper records of 192 employees of a certain company were left by a hospital employee on a subway train.

One state representative said that there is not enough vigilance on the part of the health care industry. The HHS conducted an examination on the status of security measures at health care facilities across the U.S. It was found that the system that houses the patient’s records is vulnerable to intrusion. The investigations done at seven large hospitals, in different states, revealed a glaring truth. Unencrypted personal data of patients was stored on computers that can be easily accessed by unauthorized users.

The privacy and security of people’s health records might be at stake. The reported breaches of medical privacy have increased over the years. Included in the list of medical privacy breaches are nearly 300 hospitals, doctors and insurance companies. With the impending government efforts to shift to electronic health care records, these lapses might give the proponents a second thought.

The proposed conversion to electronic health records expects that medical errors will be lowered, cost will be reduced, and the quality of outcomes will be improved. To strengthen the effect of the conversion, the government is exhausting all possible means to enforce existing rules about medical privacy and security.

There are some apprehensions from some health care experts. They are wondering if the enforcement of existing laws alone would be enough. Some of them believe that there is a need for stronger laws, like making it a criminal offense when information is not obtained properly. On the part of the public, they are afraid that they could not get health insurance once their private information becomes known.

For the second time, Google suffered an attack. This time, it was in its email service – Gmail. The company said that email accounts of hundreds of its subscribers had their passwords stolen and their emails monitored. The victims included some senior U.S. government officials, Chinese political activists, some Asian countries officials, journalists and military personnel.

Google pointed to an area in China to be the source of the secret attack. It would be recalled that China was also the suspected origin of the first attack. That incident led to the transfer by Google of its Chinese search engine base to Hong Kong. It said that the recent attack may not be as sophisticated in terms of technology as the first one, but the victims this time were “big names”. The perpetrators used phishing, which basically uses tricks to capture the email passwords of users.

Still, according to the search engine giant, the attack was masterfully coordinated. As shown from the profiles of the victims, it can be deduced that the targets were carefully selected. It appears that someone has “entered” into one email account and used its contacts in order to victimize some other targeted users.

Privacy discussions have been going on for a long time and will remain as technology develops. The discussion topics center mostly on the handling of private information. Another task assigned to internet companies is how to minimize users’ risks. Because of this, it is foreseen that organizations will implement stronger privacy policies. There will be an increasing demand for encryption, web filtering and other forms of risk management.

Both consumers and corporations are now working together on handling privacy and confidentiality of location-based information. As GPS technology becomes more advanced, companies have to deal with protection of personally identifiable information. Providing real-time information that is location-based is also becoming important. There is also a conflict in providing real-time information, especially that which are location-based. Then, there is also a pressing need to locate where people are during a given time.

A survey result revealed that nearly one-fourth of total time spent online goes to social networking. It is during this time that social networks gather a host of personal information. Users have the tendency to unmindfully provide their data without fear of its consequences. As the amount of data accumulates, so does the danger of breach. There is a potential risk of exposing these millions of data that contains identifiable personal information.

As children grow more mature, parents need to give them privacy as to their time and space. The household is the place where children first learn the values of trust and responsibility. As such, children need to live with parents who are themselves trustworthy and responsible. And this all begins with giving them the privacy that they need.

Parents sometimes get upset when they realize that their child wants his or her own private time. When dealt with in a wrong way, children will find it difficult to learn to develop trust and responsibility. The best way for parents to handle this kind of situation is to talk with their child. They should ask why he or she needs to be alone.

It is very important for parents to know why he or she needs some private time and space. Then, they should discern whether their child is telling the truth. It is also important that they make certain that the reason given is a part of growing up, and not for hiding something. A child who needs to be alone too often is not normal and it could be a sign that he or she needs counseling.