Laws of Identity too technically orientated

Just been looking at a condensed form of Kim Cameron’s “Laws of identity”. I can’t leave a comment due to some problem on the web-site.

However, after having read the technical version some time ago and then again now reading this non-technical version, I am feeling more and more how technically orientated it is. Take for example the first point: “People using computers should be in control of giving out information about themselves”, but why is it only people using computers? It could also be people not using computers, RFID chips in passports or ID cards for example.

It should state “People using/possessing any device capable of holding or linking to PII should be in control of giving out information about themselves”, or something like that.

California trying to be privacy conscious…..

It seems that California is better than Iowa at protecting the privacy of residents and customers, or at least trying!

“A federal appeals court reinstated part of California’s financial privacy law Thursday, allowing consumers to prevent banks from sharing information with affiliated companies about a customer’s savings account or buying habits.” Read more….

Do you trust your government to protect your identity?

Can you imagine what’s going on in the U.S.? If you trust your government with your personal information, think again. Money is more important for them!

Iowa county officials have been negotiating with a real estate database company to sell the contents of a database that includes the Social Security numbers and other personal information of mortgage holders statewide. The site,, said Wednesday it negotiated selling its database and ongoing updates for about $11,750 a month to Data Tree, a company that manages more than 4 billion records nationwide. Read more…