This guide to online job sites is a list of the top job searching sites online. This list gives information about the privacy practices at each site. Because resumes contain such detailed personal and professional information, it is well worth caring about how job search sites handle privacy issues. This guide is updated monthly, and we add new information to the guide monthly.
Job Search Privacy -- The World Privacy Forum's popular and long-standing Job Searcher's Guide has been completely updated. We have a site-by-site comparison of the privacy practices of online job search sites. This guide was originally posted in 2003, and has been updated regularly. This was a major update of this resource. The World Privacy Forum publishes extensive job search privacy resources in addition to the Guide, including a very popular guide to resume posting privacy.
Consumer resource -- We have updated the World Privacy Forum's state-by-state guide on how to place a credit, or security, freeze. Only a few states are lacking a security or credit freeze law now.
“This guide is not just a retread of what HIPAA is and does,” said Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum. “Our guide gives patients practical details and strategies on how they can use the law to protect their privacy and navigate the medical system. Best of all, it is easy to use.”
Monster.com | Consumer Alert | Job search privacy -- According to the job site Monster.com, its users' IDs and passwords, email addresses, names, phone numbers, and some "basic demographic data" were compromised in a data breach. Monster notified victims of the security breach through its web site on Friday, January 23, 2009. It is unclear how many people this notice impacts, as Monster.com did not give an estimate. In press reports, however, Monster has admitted that the breach is global, with Asia Pacific and Eastern Europe being spared. Job seekers' information can be used like a road map for criminal ventures, including identity theft, phishing and spamming. User passwords, which Monster.com says were compromised in this breach, are especially valuable as they can potentially be used to access other sites or email accounts, especially if a person regularly uses the same passwords. The World Privacy Forum has published a consumer alert about this data breach with tips for victims. This data breach also impacts USAjobs.com, the government job search site affiliated wiith Monster.com.
In order to have a meaningful privacy discussion about kiosk issues, it is important to first address some general questions.
Unicru, a Beaverton, Oregon company dominates the kiosk space. Unicru says it processes approximately one job application per second during the average U.S. workday. All totalled, Unicru processes about 6 million job applicants per year, and has processed a total of more than 19.5 million candidate applications. In 2002, Unicru achieved record revenues of $21.1 million and was recognized as one of the fastest- growing companies in the U.S. It says that it is the leading provider of hiring management systems.
European Privacy Seal -- Ixquick.com is the first search engine to receive formal EU privacy approval. The EuroPriSe (European Privacy Seal) was awarded to Ixquick after a lengthy certification process. Ixquick deletes its users\' IP addresses after 48 hours.
Consumer Excellence Award -- World Privacy Forum executive director Pam Dixon has received a 2008 Consumer Excellence Award for her leadership and work in the area of medical identity theft and consumer privacy from Consumer Action. Also honored was Herb Weisbaum, a 5-time Emmy-winner who is a consumer contributor to NBC's Today Show. Consumer Action was founded in 1971 and is a national non-profit organization focused on consumer education and advocacy. The awards ceremony was held in San Francisco on June 26th. The World Privacy Forum is honored to accept this award.
Financial privacy -- The World Privacy Forum filed comments with the Federal Trade Commission today about its proposed study of credit -based pricing practices for homeowners insurance. The World Privacy Forum requested that the FTC ask insurers if there are specific procedures in place for detecting, mitigating, and responding to consumers who have been victims of identity theft. The WPF noted its support for the FTC's use of the FTC Act Section 6(b) authority to acquire robust information from the insurance companies.
Internet privacy -- The World Privacy Forum, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse and EPIC were joined by California-based EFF, the ACLU of Northern California, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of California and other national groups in asking Google's CEO Eric Schmidt to provide a prominent link to the Google privacy policy directly from its home page. Google has recently been criticized for not providing a link to its privacy policy from its home page, as the California Online Privacy Protection Act requires. The groups noted that linking to a privacy policy on a home page is considered a widespread best practice.
SACGHS | Oversight of genetic testing -- The Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health and Society (SACGHS) released its final report on Oversight of Genetic Testing (U.S. System of Oversight of Genetic Testing: A Response to the Charge of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, April 2008, PDF, 276 pages). This is a substantial, thoughtful report that is likely to have a long-term impact on the field. The World Privacy Forum submitted formal written comments regarding this report when it was in draft form, and also appeared before the Committee in person in February of 2008 to discuss additional information relevant to the report. The final report reflects the World Privacy Forum comments and testimony. The report now includes a discussion about Direct to Consumer advertising and marketing as well as related privacy issues. The discussion in the final report also now acknowledges the implications of Direct to Consumer marketing of genetic tests regarding online privacy. The final report also reflects generally increased attention to privacy issues.
Health Care Innovations workshop -- The World Privacy Forum will be speaking at an upcoming FTC workshop on the topics of medical identity theft, personal health records, and direct-to-consumer genetic tests and marketing. The workshop is April 24, 2008. Workshop information is available at the FTC web site.
Behaviorally targeted advertising | FTC proposed rules -- The World Privacy Forum filed comments in response to the Federal Trade Commission's proposed self-regulatory guidelines for companies targeting online advertising to consumers based on consumer behaviors. The WPF requested a separate, formal rulemaking process for determining how sensitive medical information should be handled online regarding behaviorally targeted advertisements. The WPF also discussed genetic data and requests for genetic tests, and noted that genetic information should be included in any definition of sensitive medical information. The WPF reiterated that the definition of personally identifiable information should include IP address, and encouraged the FTC to work from a rights-based approach regarding online advertising. The WPF also urged the FTC to include all fair information practices in any self-regulatory regime, and to enforce the regime directly.
New publication | PHRs and privacy -- The World Privacy Forum has published a new legal and policy analysis examining Personal Health Records -- or PHRs -- and the privacy issues associated with them. This analysis, Personal Health Records: Why Many PHRs Threaten Privacy, was prepared by Robert Gellman for the World Privacy Forum. The analysis finds that significant, serious threats to privacy exist in some PHRs.
Consumer advisory | PHRs and privacy -- The World Privacy Forum has issued a consumer advisory about the privacy of PHRs to help consumers understand and approach the complex privacy issues PHRs can raise. Consumers need to know that not all PHRs protect privacy in the same way, and some PHR systems can undermine consumer privacy in serious ways that consumers may not be expecting.
Financial privacy / credit reports -- The NCLC, Consumer's Union, and the World Privacy Forum filed extensive joint comments today regarding the proposed rulemaking, Procedures to Enhance the Accuracy and Integrity of Information Furnished to Consumer Reporting Agencies under Section 312 of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act. The results of the proposed rulemaking will have a significant impact on how the accuracy of credit reports is defined for consumers, and will have a substantive influence over how consumers may handle credit report disputes directly with those who furnish information for the reports.
Genetic privacy | SACGHS -- The World Privacy Forum filed extensive comments with the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health and Society (SACGHS) regarding its draft report on genetic testing oversight, U.S. System of Oversight of Genetic Testing: A Response to the Charge of the Secretary of HHS. The World Privacy Forum requested SACGHS pay more attention in its final report to the privacy consequences of unregulated genetic testing that occurs outside the health care sector. The WPF comments note that current and proposed remedies for the misuse of genetic information tend to focus on the use of the information within the health care treatment, payment, and insurance systems. What is crucially important is to analyze how to protect genetic information in the realm of commercial collection, maintenance, use and disclosures. Another area the comments discuss is the potential for new forms of fraudulent activity related to genetic testing (Phantom genetic testing, that is, genetic tests marketed to consumers that are not even real or viable genetic tests.) The World Privacy Forum specifically recommended that the National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics be tasked with looking at this matter, that an independent pre-market assessment mechanism is created for genetic tests offered outside the clinical setting, and that privacy be expressly discussed in the overarching recommendations in the final report.
This report is an in-depth analysis of the history and current operations of the National Advertising Initiative (NAI) self-regulatory agreement.
Roadmap: The National Advertising Initiative – Failing at Consumer Protection and at Self-Regulation: Difficulties with the NAI When people sit at their computers and browse for new car information or to learn about the latest treatment for diabetes, when people walk down the street reading stock quotes on their mobile phones, and when people text a response for more information based on a television commercial they saw, their actions speak louder than words. A new realm of consumer tracking has grown up to translate these activities into advertisements. This kind of advertising is behaviorally targeted advertising. Behaviorally targeted advertising is as controversial as it is lucrative.
In 1999, when online advertising was still a fresh segment of the advertising sector, widespread concerns arose about the ways that consumers could be tracked and targeted online for advertising purposes. The Federal Trade Commission held a workshop on online profiling in November 1999. [6] The concerns of the day were distilled in a FTC report to Congress in June 2000, Online Profiling: A Report to Congress. In that report, the FTC found that online profiling presented privacy problems for consumers. The FTC found that online profiling was primarily accomplished through banner ads, cookies, and web bugs, also called web beacons. [7] The Commission also concluded that online profiling was largely invisible to consumers:
The essential activity of the NAI is to define terms, discuss a handful of abbreviated consumer rights, which the NAI calls its “principles,” and to set up a structure of “opt-out cookies.”
Although it is possible to identify many aspects of the NAI that are broken, this report focuses on four areas in particular: 1) the effectiveness of the NAI opt-out cookie as the primary tool for stopping tracking; 2) the applicability of the NAI to types of tracking that extend beyond the traditional cookie and to business models not expressly covered by the NAI; 3) the constantly shifting membership of the NAI; and 4) auditing and enforcement of the NAI.
Report | Internet privacy | NAI -- The World Privacy Forum published a new report today, The Network Advertising Initiative: Failing at Consumer Protection and at Self-Regulation. The report is an in-depth analysis of the history and current operations of the National Advertising Initiative (NAI) self-regulatory agreement. The NAI was created to protect consumers' online privacy in the behavioral advertising arena. The report finds that the NAI has failed. The report discusses the failure of the NAI opt-out cookie, the uses of persistent consumer tracking technologies that go beyond cookies, such as Flash cookies, browser cache cookies, XML super cookies, and other issues. The report also discusses the practice of re-setting cookies after cookie deletion. The report gathers the details of the difficult membership history of the NAI, as well as the enforcement history of TRUSTe regarding NAI.
Consensus document | Consumer rights and protections -- Nine privacy and consumer groups, including the World Privacy Forum, unveiled a consensus document outlining key consumer rights and protections in the behavioral advertising sector. The document is directed toward the Federal Trade Commission, and urges the FTC to take proactive steps to adequately protect consumers as online and other forms of behavioral tracking and targeting become more ubiquitous. The consensus document was filed with the Secretary of the FTC and its commissioners. Behavioral advertising is the focus of the FTC's eHavioral Advertising Town Hall meeting taking place November 1-2 in Washington, D.C. The network advertising sector has a self-regulatory plan, the Network Advertising Initiative, in place, and has had this plan in place since 2000. The consensus document addresses the many areas where the NAI plan has failedto protect consumers.