-
WhatsApp spy attack and after
-
by
Theres Sudeep
—
published
Dec 15, 2019
—
filed under:
Internet Governance,
Privacy
Bengaluru experts analyse the Pegasus snooping scandal, and provide advice on what you can do about the gaping holes in your mobile phone security.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
News & Media
-
Power over privacy: New Personal Data Protection Bill fails to really protect the citizen’s right to privacy
-
by
Nikhil Pahwa
—
published
Dec 15, 2019
—
filed under:
Internet Governance,
Privacy
Nikhil Pahwa throws light on the new personal data protection bill.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
News & Media
-
ICANN takes one step forward in its human rights and accountability commitments
-
by
Akriti Bopanna and Ephraim Percy Kenyanito
—
published
Dec 17, 2019
—
last modified
Dec 19, 2019 11:35 AM
—
filed under:
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
ICANN,
IANA,
Internet Governance
Akriti Bopanna and Ephraim Percy Kenyanito take a look at ICANN's Implementation Assessment Report for the Workstream 2 recommendations and break down the key human rights considerations in it. Akriti chairs the Cross Community Working Party on Human Rights at ICANN and Ephraim works on Human Rights and Business for Article 19, leading their ICANN engagement.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Data Infrastructures and Inequities: Why Does Reproductive Health Surveillance in India Need Our Urgent Attention?
-
by
Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon
—
published
Feb 14, 2019
—
last modified
Dec 30, 2019 04:44 PM
—
filed under:
Big Data,
Data Systems,
Privacy,
Researchers at Work,
Internet Governance,
Research,
BD4D,
Healthcare,
Surveillance,
Big Data for Development
In order to bring out certain conceptual and procedural problems with health monitoring in the Indian context, this article by Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon posits health monitoring as surveillance and not merely as a “data problem.” Casting a critical feminist lens, the historicity of surveillance practices unveils the gendered power differentials wedded into taken-for-granted “benign” monitoring processes. The unpacking of the Mother and Child Tracking System and the National Health Stack reveals the neo-liberal aspirations of the Indian state.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Extra-Territorial Surveillance and the Incapacitation of Human Rights
-
by
Arindrajit Basu
—
published
Dec 31, 2019
—
last modified
Jan 02, 2020 11:02 AM
—
filed under:
Cybersecurity,
Cyber Security,
Internet Governance
This paper was published in Volume 12 (2) of the NUJS Law Review.
Located in
Internet Governance
-
Decrypting Automated Facial Recognition Systems (AFRS) and Delineating Related Privacy Concerns
-
by
Arindrajit Basu, Siddharth Sonkar
—
published
Jan 02, 2020
—
last modified
Jan 02, 2020 02:01 PM
—
filed under:
Cybersecurity,
Cyber Security,
internet governance,
Internet Governance
Arindrajit Basu and Siddharth Sonkar have co-written this blog as the first of their three-part blog series on AI Policy Exchange under the parent title: Is there a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy from Data Aggregation by Automated Facial Recognition Systems?
Located in
Internet Governance
-
Comments to the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019
-
by
Amber Sinha, Elonnai Hickok, Pallavi Bedi, Shweta Mohandas, Tanaya Rajwade
—
published
Feb 12, 2020
—
last modified
Feb 21, 2020 10:13 AM
—
filed under:
Internet Governance,
Data Protection,
Privacy
The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on December 11, 2019.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Content takedown and users' rights
-
by
Torsha Sarkar, Gurshabad Grover
—
published
Feb 14, 2020
—
last modified
Feb 17, 2020 05:18 AM
—
filed under:
Internet Freedom,
Internet Governance,
Intermediary Liability,
Censorship
After Shreya Singhal v Union of India, commentators have continued to question the constitutionality of the content takedown regime under Section 69A of the IT Act (and the Blocking Rules issued under it). There has also been considerable debate around how the judgement has changed this regime: specifically about (i) whether originators of content are entitled to a hearing, (ii) whether Rule 16 of the Blocking Rules, which mandates confidentiality of content takedown requests received by intermediaries from the Government, continues to be operative, and (iii) the effect of Rule 16 on the rights of the originator and the public to challenge executive action. In this opinion piece, we attempt to answer some of these questions.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Governing ID: Introducing our Evaluation Framework
-
by
Shruti Trikanad
—
published
Mar 02, 2020
—
last modified
Mar 02, 2020 08:03 AM
—
filed under:
internet governance,
Internet Governance,
Digital ID,
Digital Identity
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Governing ID: India’s Unique Identity Programme
-
by
Vrinda Bhandari
—
published
Mar 02, 2020
—
filed under:
internet governance,
Internet Governance,
Digital ID,
Digital Identity
Located in
Internet Governance
