Privacy Implications of Surveillance Systems (original) (raw)

Surveillance, Privacy and Security

Surveillance, Privacy and Security, 2017

This volume examines the relationship between privacy, surveillance and security, and the alleged privacy-security trade-off, focusing on the citizen's perspective. Recent revelations of mass surveillance programmes clearly demonstrate the everincreasing capabilities of surveillance technologies. The lack of serious reactions to these activities shows that the political will to implement them appears to be an unbroken trend. The resulting move into a surveillance society is, however, contested for many reasons. Are the resulting infringements of privacy and other human rights compatible with democratic societies? Is security necessarily depending on surveillance? Are there alternative ways to frame security? Is it possible to gain in security by giving up civil liberties, or is it even necessary to do so, and do citizens adopt this trade-off? This volume contributes to a better and deeper understanding of the relation between privacy, surveillance and security, comprising in-depth investigations and studies of the common narrative that more security can only come at the expense of sacrifice of privacy. The book combines theoretical research with a wide range of empirical studies focusing on the citizen's perspective. It presents empirical research exploring factors and criteria relevant for the assessment of surveillance technologies. The book also deals with the governance of surveillance technologies. New approaches and instruments for the regulation of security technologies and measures are presented, and recommendations for security policies in line with ethics and fundamental rights are discussed. This book will be of much interest to students of surveillance studies, critical security studies, intelligence studies, EU politics and IR in general.

Introduction: Surveillance, Privacy and Security

In modern societies, surveillance is progressively emerging as a key governing tech- nique of state authorities, corporations and individuals:‘the focused, systematic and routine attention to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction’ (Lyon, 2007, p. 14). The ‘Snowden revelations’ of mass-surveillance programmes brought into the light of day the ever-increasing and far-reaching capabilities of digital surveillance technologies (Greenwald, 2014). The lack of serious reactions to these activities shows that the political will to implement digital surveillance technologies appears to be an unbroken trend. This drive towards a security governance based on digital mass-surveillance raises, however, several issues: Are the resulting infringements of privacy and other human rights compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union or the EU data protection framework and the values of demo- cratic societies? Does security necessarily depend upon mass-surveillance? Are there alternative ways to frame security? Do surveillance technologies address the most pressing security needs, and if so, are they the most efficient means to do so? In other words, the promotion and adoption by state authorities of mass-surveil- lance technologies invites us to ask again if the argument of increasing security at the cost of civil liberties is acceptable, and thus to call into question the very idea that this would be necessary to preserve democratic societies. Focusing on the citizens’ perspective on surveillance, privacy and security, this volume contributes new insights from empirical research and theoretical analysis to a debate, characterized by evident tendencies to provide simplified answers to apparently multidimensional and correspondingly complex societal issues like security. This book tries to further nurture a debate that challenges the assumption that more security requires less privacy, and that more surveillance necessarily implies more security (Bigo et al., 2008). A key motivation is the wish to incorporate into new analyses the perspectives, attitudes and preferences of citizens, understood as being the main beneficiaries of security measures, while at the same time potential and actual targets of mass-surveillance programmes conducted in the name of responding to imminent security threats.

The Surveillance Society and the Third-Party Privacy Problem

2013

This Article examines a question that has become increasingly important in the emerging surveillance society: Should the law treat information as private even though others know about it? This is the third-party privacy problem. Part II explores two competing conceptions of privacy-the binary and contextual conceptions. Part III describes two features of the emerging surveillance society that should change the way we address the third-party privacy problem. One feature, "surveillance on demand," results from exponential increases in data collection and aggregation. The other feature, "uploaded lives," reflects a revolution in the type and amount of information that we share digitally. Part IV argues that the binary conception cannot protect privacy in the surveillance society because it fails to account for the new realities of surveillance on demand and uploaded lives. Finally, Part V illustrates how courts and legislators can implement the contextual conception to deal with two emerging surveillance society problems-facial recognition technology and geolocation data.

SITUATION REPORT ON PRIVACY IN A SURVEILLANCE SOCIETY

We now live in a society were our privacy is under threat due to all pervasive electronic surveillance. The creation, collection, storage and processing of our personal data in the electronic form is a ubiquitous phenomenon.The correlation between privacy and security of the data needs no further emphasis in a world where global surveillance is the norm. Individual privacy cannot be ensured when our entire public cyber infrastructure is inherently insecure and open to snooping. The cyber world post Snowden is going to see dramatic upheavals. ‘Security is the only service that cannot be outsourced’

Privacy is not the Antidote to Surveillance

Surveillance Society, 2009

We live in a surveillance society 2. The creation, collection and processing of personal data is nearly a ubiquitous phenomenon. Every time we use a loyalty card at a retailer, our names are correlated with our purchases and entered into giant databases. Every time we pass an electronic toll booth on the highway, every time we use a cell phone or a credit card, our locations are being recorded, analyzed and stored. Every time we go to see a doctor, submit an insurance claim, pay our utility bills, interact with the government, or go online, the picture gleaned from our actions and states grows finer and fatter. * An earlier version of this essay, co-authored with Jesse Hirsh, has been published as Privacy Won't Help Us (Fight Surveillance) on the nettime mailing list (June 26, 2002).

Surveillance and Privacy, Geography of

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2015

Surveillance and privacy are mutually exclusive: if one increases, the other decreases. After defining these terms and their relation to each other, this article introduces key concepts in the field of surveillance studies, followed by a discussion of classical forms of surveillance and privacy invasion, namely, forms of visual surveillance. The second half of the article departs from the surveillance of individuals to new technological trends that represent new challenges to privacy concerns and the social sorting of populations through software algorithms. Surveillance Surveillance is a complex issue that has sparked a number of definitions. Because we have to start somewhere, we defer to two intellectual authorities in the field, Lyon (2007) and Marx (2012), who define surveillance in general terms outside the risk and security discourse in which it is often applied. Lyon (2007, p. 14) defines surveillance as follows: (...) the focused, systematic and routine attention to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction. Surveillance directs its attentions in the end to individuals (even though aggregated data, such as those available in the public domain, may be used to build up a background picture). It is focused. By systematic, I mean that this attention to personal details is not random, occasional or spontaneous; it is deliberate and depends on certain protocols and techniques. Marx applies a similar individually focused angle to his definition: At the most general level surveillance of human (which is often, but need not, be synonymous with human surveillance) can be defined as regard or attendance to a person or to factors presumed to be associated with a person. Marx, 2012, p. xxv While outlining various more detailed subfields of surveillance, Marx maintains a relatively strong focus on one individual or group attending to another individual or group. Thus, some common classificatory notion can be applied. In the case of surveillance social structures, for example, we can identify the surveillance agent (weather as watcher/observer/seeker/inspector/ auditor/tester), while the person about whom information is sought or reported is the surveillance subject. Marx, 2012, p. xxv, emphasis in original

Governmental Surveillance - The balance between security and privacy

2020

The increased digitalisation of society and recent developments in AI is laying the ground for surveillance capabilities of a magnitude we have not seen before. Surveillance can be conducted by several different actors in society, this project focuses on the Swedish police currently using a large ensemble of surveillance technologies. Earlier this year, significant legislative changes governing the police authorities use of digital surveillance were enacted. These changes mean that the police now have been given an extended mandate to use digital surveillance as part of their professional practice, which places demands on balanced decisions and informed responsibility. On the one hand, the police have an interest to use digital surveillance to increase efficiency and security in society; on the other hand, the police must balance their interests with citizen’s so-called integrity-interests and right to privacy. This study will therefore examine to what extent the Swedish Police Auth...

ETHICAL SOCIETY And SURVEILLANCE

Though unknown to the societies of our past, surveillance is something common in contemporary society. Many people may talk of its need and its benefits. This paper, however, will rather explain how advanced surveillance techniques introduce limitations in public life and show the scenarios in which privacy and personal data are being abused. It will also state reasons to why supervision is leading to a sense of insecurity in modern society.

Surveillance and its discontents

Surveillance in the sense of gathering information about people existed throughout history, a simple example can be given from the Roman Empire when Caesar Augustus issued a decree for taking census throughout the empire, in order to maintain the functioning of the Empire and collect taxes (Claytor & Bagnall, 215; Lyon, 1994, p. 22). Therefore, since it’s an old social event, one wonders what’s the matter with surveillance today? Why so much attention is increasing in regards to surveillance since the last decade? Are there any differences between the surveillance since the times of the Roman Empire with surveillance today? And if so what are they? All these questions will be answered in this paper. It will begin by attempting to define what is surveillance, then it will examine the 2009 House of Lords Report (HOL) on this subject, then it will critically examine some of the issues raised in the report; particularly how surveillance shapes the relationship between the citizens and the state, the Public-Private sectors relationship, and abuses of surveillance.

Dilemmas of privacy and surveillance: chaljenges of technological change

2007

Increasing amounts of electronic data about individuals are being collected as we go about our daily lives. This is beneficial when it means, for example, easier access to medical records at the time and place they are needed, better personal security against theft and violence, and more precisely targeted supermarket special offers. But these benefits come at a cost; there is always a trade off between data collection and preserving our privacy.