Couple of things I’ve been meaning to post.

- A paper (launched last July), Privacy in Camera Networks: a Technical Perspective (PDF), which proposes technical means by which camera networks could be built that preserve privacy. The paper also talks about the Constitution Project’s model legislation in this area. In last week’s net.wars (http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/3653), I mourn the fact that the kinds of debate the CP thinks should take place about camera networks - stating their purpose, reviewing their effectiveness, accepting citizen input regarding their impact, etc. - do not take place, and also surmise that neither this type of debate nor the technical measures will ever happen because a) it’s harder to implement the technical measures than not to do so; b) governments have no incentive to do these things because c) the public in general has proved too willing to accept the cameras as is.

- I note that the subprime mortgage lending mess continues to spread. Inadequate risk management in the interests of making profits seems an even more likely threat to information assurance than many of the things we have already discussed here. (Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, this means YOU.)

- In an interview this week, the managing director of the private banking branch of one of Europe’s oldest banks noted several very interesting statistics. TMost British (and European) entrepreneurs 50-65 years old (the majority of their businesses, SMEs, are