Latest news with #FOIA
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
iDox.ai Launches Redaction Engine That Learns You: Personalized AI Now Available
AI-powered redaction software now adapts to document types, user behavior, and organization-specific needs with ongoing learning and customization features Fremont, California, June 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- has launched a significant enhancement to its document redaction tool platform, Redact, with the introduction of Personalized AI, a suite of features that allows redaction tools to intelligently adjust based on document type, redaction history, and user Logo The Personalized AI update addresses the growing demand for smarter and more adaptable document processing in industries handling sensitive information, including legal, healthcare, finance, and law enforcement. Rather than relying on static rules, Redact now learns over time, providing users with redaction tools that become increasingly accurate and tailored to their workflows. Key components of the release include: Document Type Recognition: The AI automatically identifies document categories—such as contracts, medical records, or police reports—and adjusts its logic to match relevant redaction standards. This includes context-aware entity detection, like patient identifiers in medical files or license numbers in law enforcement records. Adaptive Entity Recognition: The system identifies and redacts sensitive content based on prior user actions, learning from ongoing redaction behavior to improve future performance. Regulation-Aware Data Profiles: Now supports a broad range of sensitive information types—including PII, PHI, racial covenants, and key business and financial data—with built-in awareness of compliance standards like HIPAA, GDPR, and FOIA. Manual Edits and Overrides: Users retain full control with the ability to fine-tune or override AI suggestions through a real-time editing interface. Whitelisting Functionality: Organizations can preserve specific terms or phrases from redaction, such as job titles or internal codes, improving accuracy and consistency. User and Team Learning: The system evolves with each user and team's redaction patterns, allowing it to provide more precise, context-appropriate suggestions as it accumulates insights. 'Our mission with Personalized AI is to deliver smarter, more human-aware redaction,' said Jeremy Wei, Founder of 'It's about context, control, and continuously improving performance tailored to each organization's needs.' The Personalized AI capabilities are now available to all current users of Redact. This release strengthens position at the forefront of AI-driven redaction by uniting adaptive personalization with deep regulatory awareness, enabling organizations to safeguard sensitive data while keeping pace with changing compliance requirements. About Designed for compliance-intensive environments, leverages artificial intelligence to automate and optimize document workflows across industries, with a primary focus on protecting sensitive data through features like PDF redaction, data security, and extraction. CONTACT: Gregory Sallis media@ while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
India Today
3 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
Elon Musk deletes post claiming Donald Trump is named in Jeffrey Epstein files
Tech titan Elon Musk has deleted his X post, in which he dropped a bombshell, claiming that US President Donald Trump was named in files pertaining to the case of late sex offender Jeffrey move hints at a possible truce with Trump since the duo exchanged barbs on social media a few days month, the billionaire quit the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and has been at loggerheads with Trump over the "big, beautiful bill" (spending bill) and the sweeping tax On Thursday, Musk accused Trump of being named in the sealed Epstein files, suggesting that was the "real reason" they were never released."Time to drop the really big bomb. Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!" he said in a now-deleted X post. Musk followed that with a second post, which he also deleted, saying, "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out."Trump said on Friday that he was "particularly not interested" in speaking to Musk, who, he claimed, had "lost his mind".Musk had bankrolled a large part of Trump's presidential campaign after the Republican's twin assassination attempts last EPSTEIN FILESadvertisementThe Epstein files - a collection of court documents, testimony, and sealed records related to the financier's sex trafficking ring - have long been the subject of speculation. While many prominent names have surfaced, others remain hidden behind court recent remarks about Trump's alleged ties to Epstein have reignited speculation among conspiracy theorists and online investigators. Many believe the administration is still withholding sensitive and potentially incriminating files related to the February, Attorney General Pam Bondi added fuel to the fire by promoting the release of documents from the Justice Department. However, much of what was made public at that time had already been available for years through court cases, public records, lawsuits and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) a 2014 photo of Elon Musk with Ghislaine Maxwell resurfaced online. Maxwell, a longtime associate and former girlfriend of Epstein, was convicted in 2021 for aiding his trafficking of underage image, taken at a Hollywood party, has been widely circulated, though Musk previously dismissed the interaction as a mere 2018, Epstein reportedly told a New York Times reporter he had advised Musk, a claim Musk firmly denied, insisting he had no professional or personal ties to Epstein.(with inputs from Reuters)Tune InMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Donald Trump#Elon Musk
The Herald Scotland
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Supreme Court blocks disclosure of DOGE operations for now
The court's three liberal justices - Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson - disagreed with that decision. A federal judge had said Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington is allowed to question the head of DOGE and receive certain documents to help make its case that DOGE must comply with the nation's premier public disclosure law. U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled in March that DOGE appears to have enough independent authority that it should be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. But he later said additional information is needed to evaluate the administration's claim that DOGE is merely a presidential advisory body. Chief Justice John Roberts had previously paused Cooper's order requiring some transparency to give the justices time to consider the administration's emergency request that the order be quashed. The Justice Department argued Cooper's order "turns FOIA on its head," effectively requiring disclosure before courts have definitively said DOGE must comply with the act. That could lead to "opening season for FOIA requests on the President's advisors," Solicitor General John Sauer argued in his request. The watchdog group responded that the administration wants the courts to "blindly yield" to its characterization of DOGE. That would give the president free reign to create entities to get around transparency laws, CREW told the Supreme Court. Elon Musk, who launched DOGE, has complained that people are unfairly blaming DOGE for all problems in the Trump administration. "DOGE is just becoming the whipping boy for everything," Musk said in an interview with the Washington Post published May 27. "So, like, something bad would happen anywhere, and we would get blamed for it even if we had nothing to do with it." Musk previously called DOGE, "the most transparent organization in government ever."
Time of India
4 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Social Security privacy concerns mount as US Supreme Court authorises DOGE's access to data of millions of Americans
The US Supreme Court on Friday sided with the Trump administration in two critical decisions involving the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The rulings allow DOGE broad access to personal records held by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and delay enforcement of transparency rules sought by a government watchdog group. By a 6-3 vote, the conservative-majority court granted DOGE permission to access sensitive SSA databases containing the personal details of millions of Americans. This includes financial, educational and medical data. The court also paused a lower court's ruling requiring DOGE to comply with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), allowing the administration to withhold internal documents about DOGE's operations. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Belly Fat Removal Without Surgery in Algeria: The Price Might Surprise You Belly Fat Removal | Search Ads Undo Rising concerns over privacy and oversight Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented sharply, writing: 'This court has now greenlit unfettered data access to DOGE regardless—despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access.' Her concerns were echoed by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Together, they warned that the court's action posed 'grave privacy risks' to millions of Americans. Live Events The SSA holds data on anyone with a Social Security number, Medicare, or Supplemental Security Income. It administers $1.5 trillion in federal payments annually, distributing benefits to over 70 million recipients. Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works , said, 'There is no way to overstate how serious a breach this is. And my understanding is that it has already occurred.' Fallout after Musk's departure from DOGE Elon Musk, who once led DOGE, formally cut ties with the agency on 30 May. His split with President Trump became public shortly after, igniting tensions on social media. The two previously worked closely, with Trump assigning DOGE and Musk to investigate fraud within SSA. In February, SSA's acting commissioner Michelle King resigned after refusing to provide DOGE staff access to personal records. She stepped down after 30 years in government service, citing concerns over data misuse. A day later, the White House said it had appointed a temporary 'anti-fraud expert' to oversee SSA. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated, 'They haven't dug into the books yet, but they suspect that there are tens of millions of deceased people who are receiving fraudulent Social Security payments.' Leavitt added the mission was to, 'Number one, to identify duplicate payments and to end them. Number two, to identify payments that are going to deceased people who are no longer living and should no longer be receiving that money. And number three, to protect the integrity of the system for hardworking Americans who have been paying into it their entire lives.' Legal battle over Government transparency In a separate ruling, the court also halted an order from Judge Christopher Cooper, who had instructed DOGE to comply with FOIA requests. The suit, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), sought records about DOGE's internal decision-making, particularly its role in mass federal layoffs and restructuring. CREW argues that DOGE functions as a de facto government agency and must follow federal transparency laws. The administration insists DOGE is merely an advisory body and is therefore exempt. Judge Cooper previously concluded that DOGE likely exercises 'substantial independent authority' and ordered a deposition of DOGE official Amy Gleason. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit refused to block his order, prompting the administration to appeal to the Supreme Court. In its unsigned opinion, the court noted that Judge Cooper's orders 'are not appropriately tailored' and stressed that 'judicial deference and restraint' were required in reviewing internal executive branch communications. CREW responded in court filings that if the administration prevails, presidents could 'create new entities that would functionally wield substantial independent authority but are exempt from critical transparency laws.' DOGE has become a key tool in Trump's broader plan to cut government spending and reduce federal workforce numbers. It has also faced mounting legal challenges from labour unions and advocacy groups. Solicitor General D. John Sauer called earlier judicial rulings an 'overreach' into executive power. However, critics argue that unchecked access and lack of oversight could result in lasting harm to public trust and data security . Maryland District Judge Ellen Hollander, whose SSA data access restriction was overturned, earlier warned that DOGE's search for fraud was a 'fishing expedition.' Her order allowed only limited access to anonymised data unless DOGE could demonstrate a specific need. Despite Friday's rulings, the future of DOGE remains uncertain. With Musk gone and legal scrutiny intensifying, its role in reshaping federal oversight continues to spark debate over accountability, privacy, and the limits of executive power.
Economic Times
4 days ago
- Business
- Economic Times
Social Security privacy concerns mount as US Supreme Court authorises DOGE's access to data of millions of Americans
Rising concerns over privacy and oversight Live Events Fallout after Musk's departure from DOGE Legal battle over Government transparency (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The US Supreme Court on Friday sided with the Trump administration in two critical decisions involving the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The rulings allow DOGE broad access to personal records held by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and delay enforcement of transparency rules sought by a government watchdog a 6-3 vote, the conservative-majority court granted DOGE permission to access sensitive SSA databases containing the personal details of millions of Americans. This includes financial, educational and medical court also paused a lower court's ruling requiring DOGE to comply with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), allowing the administration to withhold internal documents about DOGE's Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented sharply, writing: 'This court has now greenlit unfettered data access to DOGE regardless—despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access.'Her concerns were echoed by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Together, they warned that the court's action posed 'grave privacy risks' to millions of SSA holds data on anyone with a Social Security number, Medicare, or Supplemental Security Income. It administers $1.5 trillion in federal payments annually, distributing benefits to over 70 million Altman, president of Social Security Works , said, 'There is no way to overstate how serious a breach this is. And my understanding is that it has already occurred.'Elon Musk, who once led DOGE, formally cut ties with the agency on 30 May. His split with President Trump became public shortly after, igniting tensions on social media. The two previously worked closely, with Trump assigning DOGE and Musk to investigate fraud within February, SSA's acting commissioner Michelle King resigned after refusing to provide DOGE staff access to personal records. She stepped down after 30 years in government service, citing concerns over data misuse.A day later, the White House said it had appointed a temporary 'anti-fraud expert' to oversee SSA. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated, 'They haven't dug into the books yet, but they suspect that there are tens of millions of deceased people who are receiving fraudulent Social Security payments.'Leavitt added the mission was to, 'Number one, to identify duplicate payments and to end them. Number two, to identify payments that are going to deceased people who are no longer living and should no longer be receiving that number three, to protect the integrity of the system for hardworking Americans who have been paying into it their entire lives.'In a separate ruling, the court also halted an order from Judge Christopher Cooper, who had instructed DOGE to comply with FOIA requests. The suit, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), sought records about DOGE's internal decision-making, particularly its role in mass federal layoffs and argues that DOGE functions as a de facto government agency and must follow federal transparency laws. The administration insists DOGE is merely an advisory body and is therefore Cooper previously concluded that DOGE likely exercises 'substantial independent authority' and ordered a deposition of DOGE official Amy Gleason. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit refused to block his order, prompting the administration to appeal to the Supreme its unsigned opinion, the court noted that Judge Cooper's orders 'are not appropriately tailored' and stressed that 'judicial deference and restraint' were required in reviewing internal executive branch responded in court filings that if the administration prevails, presidents could 'create new entities that would functionally wield substantial independent authority but are exempt from critical transparency laws.'DOGE has become a key tool in Trump's broader plan to cut government spending and reduce federal workforce numbers. It has also faced mounting legal challenges from labour unions and advocacy General D. John Sauer called earlier judicial rulings an 'overreach' into executive power. However, critics argue that unchecked access and lack of oversight could result in lasting harm to public trust and data security Maryland District Judge Ellen Hollander, whose SSA data access restriction was overturned, earlier warned that DOGE's search for fraud was a 'fishing expedition.' Her order allowed only limited access to anonymised data unless DOGE could demonstrate a specific Friday's rulings, the future of DOGE remains uncertain. With Musk gone and legal scrutiny intensifying, its role in reshaping federal oversight continues to spark debate over accountability, privacy, and the limits of executive power.
