|Privacy, Data Protection and Security|
|Thursday, 12 November 2015 16:55|
The 2016 presidential campaign will be kicking into high gear in the upcoming months. As the primaries begin in earnest in Iowa and New Hampshire, you can expect emails and phone call solicitations asking not only for your time, but also your money. But have you ever wondered how safe is the information you are providing a campaign online?
This past September, the Online Trust Alliance, an industry group focused on e-commerce, released a report assessing the safety of presidential campaign websites.[i] The report focuses on the following three aspects of online campaign platforms: site security, consumer protection, and privacy.
Site security addresses whether or not the campaign website is the actual website and not directed to a counterfeit source. This category also includes factors on the investment of technology such as, firewalls and encryption technology, and other programs that make hacking more difficult.
Consumer protection scores are calculated by evaluating the “adoption of email authentication and associated technologies to help protect consumers from receiving fraudulent email purporting to come from candidates, their PACs or political parties.”[ii] In other words, the political campaigns are assessed on how well they protect their websites and emails from hackers, who could create a false website and illegitimate emails.
A major reason for the low marks in privacy is attributed to the use of micro targeting by both Democratic and Republican campaigns. Micro targeting[vi] involves collections of data and statistics from voter populations that is assessed for predictive voting trends, which allows political parties to tailor their messages based on the voters’ preference of issues and streamline campaign resources to potential supporters.
The report provides us with two important lessons. First, companies need to invest in technology that will protect their websites from cyber-criminals, viruses, and other forms of malware. It may not be as extensive as a presidential campaign, but as seen in the cases of Target, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Office of Personal Management, it is evident that no information technology system, even the “best of the business” is safe from attacks.
For more information on how to assess your own data privacy needs, please visit our website.
[i] Online Trust Alliance Presidential Candidate Report found at https://otalliance.org/blog/does-your-favorite-presidential-candidate-make-grade
[ii] Terminology taken from OTA’s 2016 Presidential Candidates analysis, Pg. 10, https://otalliance.org/system/files/files/initiative/documents/2015_ota_honor_roll_-_candidates_9-18.pdf
[iii] Category scores included under the Privacy Practices Section, Pages 8-9
[iv] Under the Privacy Practices section, definition included as Promiscuous Policy, Pg. 8
[v] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTC_Fair_Information_Practice ; guidelines that represent widely accepted concepts of concerning fair information practice in an electronic marketplace as explained by the US Federal Trade Commission.