Got Privacy?
- Thread starter flythewing
- Start date
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
Sir, don't make me guess what that link may hold. Security you know.
Please post the article or at least let me know the topic so I can make an informed choice.
Thanks!
Please post the article or at least let me know the topic so I can make an informed choice.
Thanks!
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
Please post the article or whatever that thing is. Let us make an informed choice before clicking on a link.
Otherwise you're just a carnival barker.
Otherwise you're just a carnival barker.
- Thread Starter
- #4
JetBlue Airways confirmed on Thursday that in September 2002, it provided 5 million passenger itineraries to a defense contractor for proof-of-concept testing of a Pentagon project unrelated to airline security -- with help from the Transportation Security Administration.
I thought it was for CAPPS II---which (regardless of one's opinion of the program) IS INDEED related to that nebulous concept of "airline security"!flythewing said:
CaptBud330
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 255
- 2
This is absolutely shocking. The person that released the data should be fired and the company should be sued. :rant:- Thread Starter
- #7
More from www.Wired.com (No carnivale barking here, that's on HBO!)...
JetBlue Airways began sending out apologetic e-mails Thursday to customers who are infuriated that the airline gave 5 million passenger records to a defense contractor investigating national security issues.
The form letter, provided by JetBlue to Wired News, confirmed a Wired News story that JetBlue turned over the names, addresses and phone numbers of its customers in September 2002 in response to an "exceptional request from the Department of Defense to assist their contractor, Torch Concepts, with a project regarding military base security."
The e-mail was carefully worded to say that data was never provided to a government agency or used for airline security testing, that the sole copy had been destroyed, and that the Torch presentation was developed without JetBlue's knowledge. The company also expressed regret and promised never to turn over passenger information again without court order.
The letter will not be placed on the company's website, but will go out under the name of JetBlue's CEO, David Neeleman, said JetBlue spokesman Gareth Edmundson-Jones. The e-mail closed with, "I am saddened that we have shaken your faith in JetBlue but I assure you personally that we are committed to making this right." Jones added the company was "flabbergasted" when they first saw the Torch Concepts presentation.
The Torch presentation (PDF) shows that Torch investigated the viability of airline passenger profiling, by combining the JetBlue data with Social Security numbers, income levels, number of children and vehicle ownership that Torch purchased from Acxiom, a company that sells consumer data.
***
So, Mr. Neeleman says the profiling of REAL passengers was NOT used for airline security testing.
***
The Department of Homeland Security's Chief Privacy Officer, Nuala O'Connor Kelly, whose position did not exist last September, said the incident should never have happened, though her initial investigation showed this study was not under the auspices of the Transportation Security Administration.
"I plan on being squeaky clean on the testing of CAPPS II," said O'Connor Kelly, who said the event should be a wake-up call for everyone in the Department of Homeland Security
JetBlue Airways began sending out apologetic e-mails Thursday to customers who are infuriated that the airline gave 5 million passenger records to a defense contractor investigating national security issues.
The form letter, provided by JetBlue to Wired News, confirmed a Wired News story that JetBlue turned over the names, addresses and phone numbers of its customers in September 2002 in response to an "exceptional request from the Department of Defense to assist their contractor, Torch Concepts, with a project regarding military base security."
The e-mail was carefully worded to say that data was never provided to a government agency or used for airline security testing, that the sole copy had been destroyed, and that the Torch presentation was developed without JetBlue's knowledge. The company also expressed regret and promised never to turn over passenger information again without court order.
The letter will not be placed on the company's website, but will go out under the name of JetBlue's CEO, David Neeleman, said JetBlue spokesman Gareth Edmundson-Jones. The e-mail closed with, "I am saddened that we have shaken your faith in JetBlue but I assure you personally that we are committed to making this right." Jones added the company was "flabbergasted" when they first saw the Torch Concepts presentation.
The Torch presentation (PDF) shows that Torch investigated the viability of airline passenger profiling, by combining the JetBlue data with Social Security numbers, income levels, number of children and vehicle ownership that Torch purchased from Acxiom, a company that sells consumer data.
***
So, Mr. Neeleman says the profiling of REAL passengers was NOT used for airline security testing.
***
The Department of Homeland Security's Chief Privacy Officer, Nuala O'Connor Kelly, whose position did not exist last September, said the incident should never have happened, though her initial investigation showed this study was not under the auspices of the Transportation Security Administration.
"I plan on being squeaky clean on the testing of CAPPS II," said O'Connor Kelly, who said the event should be a wake-up call for everyone in the Department of Homeland Security
Yes, CAPPS II is definitely for airline security...hence the "passenger profiling system". The point is to better figure out which passengers should truly be screened and may pose a significant risk to a flight based on past criminal history and actions. I'm not here to argue for or against the system b/c there are civil liberty issues that are at stake. I am here to argue against whatever grievance you have with jetBlue that makes you exploit this as an intentional devious act by them that "has nothing to do with airline security" when, in fact, it has EVERYTHING to do with security. I also found the passenger O&D statistics to be quite interesting b/c by studying these, and airline can actually cater better to the true origin (home) of the passengers and better serve the customer by flying to the right cities. When reading through the presentation, rather than believing what the author of the wired news article stated that the report was in reference to, it was obvious that it had more of a marketing twist. The only information in the study was what you would find in any marketing database...salaries, occupation, length of residence, etc. There was no data on criminal histories nor was that intent listed in the objectives of the study. Rather, the data looks to be an aid to marketing to the proper group and serving the right markets. Once again...I'm not saying I condone this b/c it can be viewed as an infringement but...it is alot of stink to raise about something that DOESN'T have anything to do with security at military bases.flythewing said:
- Thread Starter
- #9
Dear CH12:
Your FUD (Fear, Uncertaincy and Doubt) bs meter is off the scale! First, you say it's a study on airline security, then its a marketing study. I wonder about what grievances you have against people who do not wish to have their name, address and SOCIAL SECURITY number available for any clod to find on the internet. I never said this Major screw up was intentional. Most corporations don't INTENTIONALLY release the private information of their customers. They do publicly apologize and announce steps taken so it will never happen again.
More FACTS not FUD from wired. com
The TSA, which is in charge of developing a new airline passenger-screening system called CAPPS II, adamantly denied receiving or reviewing the JetBlue data in the transfer. Turmail also said that the data was not used to test CAPPS II or CAPPS II prototypes.
Torch Concept's presentation, unearthed on a conference website by travel privacy activist and travel agent Edward Hasbrouck, shows that upon receiving the data, Torch Concepts purchased matching personal records from Acxiom, one of the country's largest data-aggregation companies.
That information included incomes, occupations, vehicle ownership information, number of children and Social Security numbers. :down:
Your FUD (Fear, Uncertaincy and Doubt) bs meter is off the scale! First, you say it's a study on airline security, then its a marketing study. I wonder about what grievances you have against people who do not wish to have their name, address and SOCIAL SECURITY number available for any clod to find on the internet. I never said this Major screw up was intentional. Most corporations don't INTENTIONALLY release the private information of their customers. They do publicly apologize and announce steps taken so it will never happen again.
More FACTS not FUD from wired. com
The TSA, which is in charge of developing a new airline passenger-screening system called CAPPS II, adamantly denied receiving or reviewing the JetBlue data in the transfer. Turmail also said that the data was not used to test CAPPS II or CAPPS II prototypes.
Torch Concept's presentation, unearthed on a conference website by travel privacy activist and travel agent Edward Hasbrouck, shows that upon receiving the data, Torch Concepts purchased matching personal records from Acxiom, one of the country's largest data-aggregation companies.
That information included incomes, occupations, vehicle ownership information, number of children and Social Security numbers. :down:
The point is that Axciom provided the personal data. You've quoted that yourself. The article is definitely slanted to point the blame at jetBlue when, in fact, the initial name list could have been aquired from the phonebook in any city. Believe it or not, name lists are sold every second of every day. All that jetBlue did was limit the data set (for an airline security improvement) to those that actually fly. The comments on a marketing study suggest that if the study was actually for CAPPS II, I don't know why in the world the only data reported was that related to a passengers proximity to the airport and length of residence. I could have come up with that on my own and don't know how the study will do anything other than show pretty graphs and interesting tidbits. Perhaps jetBlue had thought that the intention of the study was to benefit airline security but maybe they were upset that the end product did little more than figure out what kind of car Billy likes to drive.flythewing said:
Entire point is that the wired.com "facts" are slanted to point all blame on jetBlue when, in fact, they provided absolutely no confidential information. Address and phone numbers are quite easy to come by.
I wouldn't worry about the bad press concerning this issue. As long as people can still fly for cheap with a stupid box inches from their eyeballs, they wouldn't care if their first born were promised to the Taliban. On the otherhand, if it were one of those ancient dragon airlines like AA, UAL, or US, they would cruxify the company to the cross. Ride that "everyone loves Jetblue" wave while it last...another blunder and there won't be as much forgiveness.
You have to be a real piss-ant to enjoy others misfortunes this much. I guess it helps take your mind off your own situation for a while. Enjoy that while it lasts.
FarleyFarley said:
Who are you referring to? Because your entry is after my entry and you did not provide a quote, I assume you are talking to me. IF that is the case, why did you assume I was making a cut towards Jblue? There was nothing in my words to suggest a pleasure of the misfortunes of ANYONE. That's YOUR illusion. I have been in this industry and know first hand that the average passenger only cares about the bottom line....pricing. Most would sell their soul to the devil for a cheap fare and to include live tv is even better. I call tv a stupid box and frankly think all airlines should have them so passengers aren't busy looking for trouble, like many have a way of doing. Your company is riding a wonderful wave of fortune and is backed by the largest media market in the world as well as the largest business market that is happy with cheaper fares. That is not a put down. The media IS critical the second time around. Where is that being pleasurable to misfortune? Please expain yourself. If you can't see that Jetblue IS the media darling, you need to remove the dark glasses. Anyway, where is the put down in THAT? The other carriers would LOVE to have that kind of positive wave and press.
You read what you wanted to read . Might I suggest you really read what is written before you go around calling people piss ants. BTW, moderator, one can write piss but not ass? And please quote who you are talking about before you start cruxifying others.
Here's what I was referring to. Sorry for the confusion. If I'm misreading this one, forgive me in advance. But it seems that a couple of people here are enjoying watching this mess unfold. It reminds me of the one or two posters who constantly post negative information about United on the United threads. What's the point?willyloman said:Click on www.dontspyonus/jetblue/html. The lawsuits and the boycotts are ready to begin.
