Paradox Over Internet Privacy
Saturday, October 2, 2010
This past week, President Obama introduced a radical proposition that could end with the concept of Internet-communication as we know it.
On September 27, the New York Times reported on new regulations being considered by President Obama's administration that would allow national security officials to wiretap all kinds of online-communication platforms. This bill would require all Internet-based communication companies to redesign their servers and adhere to federal security measures of wiretapping laws.
Although the bill won't be submitted to lawmakers until next year, the bill is already rising doubts and criticism. Among the opposers, one of them is Christopher Calabrese, Legislative Counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.
"Mandating that all communications software be accessible to the government is a huge privacy invasion," Calabrese said.
From e-mail to Facebook and even mobile texting, law enforcement would be able to tap private communication software and track conversations in an effort to identify possible threats to the U.S., including terrorist attacks.
Furthermore, another concern brought by this bill is the possible damage to all online-communication systems in the U.S. Bruce Schneier, a security technologist, expressed his concern of the bill in a special report by CNN.
"Communications systems that have no inherent eavesdropping capabilities are more secure than systems with those capabilities built in," Schneier continued "Any surveillance system invites both criminal appropriation and government abuse."
In other words, not only will it be easier for federal security to spy on people but criminals would be more likely to do it as well, which I think defeats the purpose of increasing security measures.
Obviously, this new bill would have a drastic impact on individuals' privacy.
Of course, security is an important issue, but will you be willing to give up your privacy for increased security?
3 comments:
I tweeted about the wiretapping when I found out September 27. My tweet stated that wiretapping the Internet seems like an invasion of privacy, though I can see how it'd help the national security problem.
I am sticking to what I said.
Even though it may be considered an invasion of privacy I can see what the government is trying to achieve. Since 9/11 the government has been focused on preventing further attacks and prosecuting those who plan to attack.
This is a way for the government to have a leg up so to speak on future attacks. With the Internet being so broad and sometimes hard to trace, wiretapping would allow them to find their targets easier.
I don't think they would use the wiretapping for personal uses, at least I hope they wouldn't.
Have you ever heard of Echelon? It's kind of the same thing.
More information about Echelon: http://bit.ly/1XAz1z
Yes, you are right Angela.
I also believe better security measures for the U.S. are more important when compared to privacy issues. I believe people need a safe place to interact inorder to have privacy in the first place.
However, I believe this law won't make a difference and will only atract more criminal activity. We would lose our privacy for nothing.
Being a technology enthusiast, I see this whole issue from the "geek" perspective.
Giving the government "back doors" to our private communication systems will signify providing those same doors to criminals.
Tech-savvy criminals already use complex encryption software to hide their communications from government interception.
Hackers have successfully hacked into the Pentagon's system ( http://goo.gl/o9uz ).
Similarly,
Computer viruses have been created with the sole purpose of robbing banks virtually( http://goo.gl/3U6w ).On the same topic , don't forget about the many identity-theft reports that have taken place in the last years.
And the list of virtual crimes keeps on going, but the point is, we should not underestimate hacker's greed and desire to go beyond the "restricted".
I believe that once the government has open access to our communication systems, malicious hackers will figure out a way to do the same. Thus, our security might become even worst.
And when it comes to spying, I also hope the governemnt won't use it to spy on us; unfortunately to me, "hoping" is not as good as "knowing".
I also agree that though it seems like an invasion of privacy, it will also help security problems. However, I do wonder how they would be able to differentiate between someone making a comment against the government, and someone making an actual threat.
To a certain extent, some internet companies have some access to what their consumers are doing (like they can tell if you are illegally downloading stuff), so that would be nothing new there.
If the government does start this as a security measure, what's to stop them looking into everything going on in the cyber world?
Let's hope that if they do indeed follow through with this that they keep it all professional, and don't get carried away.
Post a Comment