Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Ancestry.com Caught Sharing Customer DNA Data With Police With No Warrant [View all]
Fuckheads need to be put out of business or have a lawsuit filed against them...
Idaho Falls, Idaho Would you find it frightening perhaps even downright Orwellian to know that a DNA swab that you sent to a company for recreational purposes would surface years later in the hands of police? What if it caused your child to end up in a police interrogation room as the primary suspect in a murder investigation?
In an extremely troubling case out of Idaho Falls, thats exactly what happened.
Police investigating the 1996 murder of Angie Dodge targeted the wrong man as the suspect, after looking to Ancestry.com owned Sorensen Database labs for help. The labs look for familial matches between the murderers DNA and DNA submitted for genealogical testing after failing to find a match using traditional methods.
According to The Electronic Frontier Foundation:
The cops chose to use a lab linked to a private collection of genetic genealogical data called the Sorenson Database (now owned by Ancestry.com), which claims its the foremost collection of genetic genealogy data in the world. The reason the Sorenson Database can make such an audacious claim is because it has obtained its more than 100,000 DNA samples and documented multi-generational family histories from volunteers in more than 100 countries around the world. Some of these volunteers were encouraged by the Mormon Churchwell-known for its interest in genealogyto provide their genetic material to the database. Sorenson promised volunteers their genetic data would only be used for genealogical services, including the determination of family migration patterns and geographic origins and would not be shared outside Sorenson.
Its consent form states:
The only individuals who will have access to the codes and genealogy information will be the principal investigator and the others specifically authorized by the Principal Investigator, including the SMGF research staff.
Despite this promise, Sorenson shared its vast collection of data with the Idaho police. Without a warrant or court order, investigators asked the lab to run the crime scene DNA against Sorensons private genealogical DNA database. Sorenson found 41 potential familial matches, one of which matched on 34 out of 35 allelesa very close match that would generally indicate a close familial relationship. The cops then asked, not only for the protected name associated with that profile, but also for all all information including full names, date of births, date and other information pertaining to the original donor to the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy project.
In an extremely troubling case out of Idaho Falls, thats exactly what happened.
Police investigating the 1996 murder of Angie Dodge targeted the wrong man as the suspect, after looking to Ancestry.com owned Sorensen Database labs for help. The labs look for familial matches between the murderers DNA and DNA submitted for genealogical testing after failing to find a match using traditional methods.
According to The Electronic Frontier Foundation:
The cops chose to use a lab linked to a private collection of genetic genealogical data called the Sorenson Database (now owned by Ancestry.com), which claims its the foremost collection of genetic genealogy data in the world. The reason the Sorenson Database can make such an audacious claim is because it has obtained its more than 100,000 DNA samples and documented multi-generational family histories from volunteers in more than 100 countries around the world. Some of these volunteers were encouraged by the Mormon Churchwell-known for its interest in genealogyto provide their genetic material to the database. Sorenson promised volunteers their genetic data would only be used for genealogical services, including the determination of family migration patterns and geographic origins and would not be shared outside Sorenson.
Its consent form states:
The only individuals who will have access to the codes and genealogy information will be the principal investigator and the others specifically authorized by the Principal Investigator, including the SMGF research staff.
Despite this promise, Sorenson shared its vast collection of data with the Idaho police. Without a warrant or court order, investigators asked the lab to run the crime scene DNA against Sorensons private genealogical DNA database. Sorenson found 41 potential familial matches, one of which matched on 34 out of 35 allelesa very close match that would generally indicate a close familial relationship. The cops then asked, not only for the protected name associated with that profile, but also for all all information including full names, date of births, date and other information pertaining to the original donor to the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy project.
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/ancestry-com-caught-sharing-dna-information-police-warrant/#dg52iJmf4xW84vCC.99
22 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ancestry.com Caught Sharing Customer DNA Data With Police With No Warrant [View all]
VScott
May 2015
OP
Thanks for the info. I am not one Ancestry right now but if I go back I will be sure not to take
jwirr
May 2015
#1
So do I. When I started the research in 1965 as a way to keep busy while I took care of my
jwirr
May 2015
#22
Shoot! I just got my DNA ancestry results back. Day late and a dollar short. Oh well. nt
Fla Dem
May 2015
#3
I was in a hurry and didn't phrase it properly. They'll baptise your dead ancestors and
REP
May 2015
#9
Well they do baptisms for the dead - but what is the source on the second accusation? nt
el_bryanto
May 2015
#12