Privacy is not the Antidote to Surveillance (original) (raw)
Related papers
Opinion. Privacy is not the antidote to surveillance
2002
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).
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’
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.
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.
Reconciling the Needs for National Security and Citizen Privacy in an Age of Surveillance
2017
This chapter explores important ethics issues regarding government surveillance on citizens. Two views are discussed regarding debates about ethics and possible model development for reconciling tensions between freedom and security. Key issues for debate are presented and these include the need to define and deliberate the meanings of privacy, abuse, proportionality, secrecy, etc. Certain propositions for debate are also offered. These are: a. It is unethical to monitor citizens who are not under any demonstrable reason of suspicion without their knowledge or permission; b. It is unethical for citizens to block necessary national security surveillance when such surveillance is proven to be needed to stop acts of crime or terrorism; c. Governments should not conceal the facts about how much they monitor citizens for national security and in what typical conditions they do so; and d. Citizens should not accuse governments who use surveillance to track criminals and terrorists as being fascists or trying to establish dictatorships. Those who surrender true liberty to a false security defend nothing worth preserving, while those who abandon real security to an illusory liberty protect nothing worth safeguarding.-Ronald Collins We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.-President Barack Obama
Harvard Journal of Law & Technology , 2017
Today, everyone is watched. While surveillance is not new, “mass surveillance” is a relatively recent phenomenon. The mainstreaming of surveillance has helped spark an antisurveillance, pro-privacy movement that extends across legal scholarship, policy debates, civil rights advocacy, political discourse, and public consciousness. There is much to praise in this burgeoning privacy movement, but also much to criticize. Privacy’s popularity hit this peak only when elites and members of mainstream society were targeted for surveillance, which means that this popularity is in many ways driven by self-interest rather than principle. If we fail to fully confront the particular convergence of interests that led to the current pro-privacy, antisurveillance movement, the result is likely to be an uneven and unjust distribution of privacy protections. The current movement does too little to acknowledge the long, dark history of surveillance of marginalized populations and gives too little thought to what that history means for the future of privacy. The fact that surveillance has been made democratic provides a unique opportunity to make privacy democratic, but this revolutionary possibility can only be realized by addressing longstanding race, gender, and class inequalities in the theory and practice of privacy.
Surveillance in the Digital Age
European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 2024
Purpose: As technology advances, electronic devices have become ubiquitous among individuals of all backgrounds. From mobile phones to computing devices, people rely on these tools on a daily basis for both personal and professional purposes. The presented research seeks to investigate the extent to which individuals are being monitored in the digital realm and identify solutions to safeguard citizens from the threat of mass surveillance. Findings: In the modern era, it is common for people to utilize various devices for a multitude of purposes, such as search engines and social networks. However, many are unaware that the information they share online is not always erased from cyberspace. This study aims to shed light on how this data is obtained and utilized and the potential risks humanity faces if privacy is not safeguarded in the digital age. Research limitations/implications: The objective of this research is to thoroughly examine the current scientific literature, studies, and articles regarding the perils of surveillance in the digital era. The paper aims to highlight the challenges associated with combating surveillance. In the concluding section of the analysis, a concise set of recommendations will be provided, which are crucial to uphold in order to safeguard individuals' constitutional rights in the face of the potential ramifications of streamlined surveillance. Originality/value: In today's digital age, it has become almost universal for people to communicate through electronic devices in cyberspace, whether for work or personal purposes. Unfortunately, this environment is often not secure, and automated surveillance models can be used to acquire people's data without their knowledge or consent. This raises serious concerns about privacy and the protection of fundamental human rights. That is why it is essential to conduct research that sheds light on the means of surveillance and explores ways to fight against it.