“What
the government wants is something they never had before. They want total
awareness. The question is, is that something we should be allowing?” In a
world where technology is increasing at an exponential rate, the amount of
personal privacy is decreasing just as quickly. For many it can be seen as a
necessary measure to ensure the safety of the public where all forms of
terrorism are on the front of many nations’ minds. In such a broad
technological world, drawing a line between collecting information for the
safety of the public versus drawing information only to have collect is not an
easy one. This gray area where governments feel the need to have information
that is needed but doesn’t infringe on personal rights in the process is very
important in the direction of personal freedom.
Edward Snowden,
a former member of the Central Intelligence Agency for the United States of
America, has two distinct portrayals in the media for his disclosure of
information on the tactics and methods the United States government uses in
everyday operation. In some eyes, he has been transformed into an internet cult
sensation that has been a hero in the fight for personal privacy. A quick
Google search yields an official White House petition yielding over 160,000 signatures
that states “Edward Snowden is a national hero and should be immediately issued
a full, free, and absolute pardon for any crimes he has committed or may have
committed”. However, not everyone shares this opinion. Words like coward and
even traitor have been used by the media. In order to understand this
polarizing divide in opinion, it is necessary to look back on the timeline that
brought Edward Snowden into infamy.
In April 2013, a
PowerPoint presentation was leaked to the media. Contained in the slides of the
PowerPoint were details of a massive data collection led by the United States
that had been backed by many large big name internet companies. Data stated
that the NSA collected nearly 3
billion pieces of intelligence inside the U.S. in February 2013 alone.
It explained how the number one source of data, Prism, was able to provide the
government with information ranging from E-mail, chat with video and voice
capability, videos, photos, shared data, File transfers even a bolded statement
stating “Special Requests”. Even more disturbing, many trusted companies such
as Microsoft, Yahoo, and even Apple were the major providers of many of this
information. It was not until June 9th, 2013 when Edward Snowden’s
identity became public. At this point in his life, he was believed hiding in
Hong Kong or Russia.
During this
time, information and privacy became a major topic of debate in the media.
Immediately, the government agencies took this disclosure of data as a major
national security issue. Only a short time later in June 14, 2013, Snowden was
charged by the United States Justice Department with “unauthorized communication of national defense
information” and “willful communication of classified communications
intelligence information to an unauthorized person”. Edward Snowden was now a criminal in the eyes of
the United States Government.
Edward Snowden was only a precursor to
the future of privacy debates in America. Despite potentially putting armed
service men at risk through his leaks on classified data, which was a major
focus in the media, he created a shift in public thought and sparked discussion
on to what extent the government should be in our technological lives. However there
is a larger problem than simply data collection.
One of the main points of
discussion in pro privacy groups is how the information is actually handled. In
the September of 2012, the United States embassy in Benghazi, Libya was
attacked by terrorists. During this numerous Americans lost their lives,
including the United States Ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens.
Initially reported through the state department and media as backlash from an
Anti-Muslim video circulating the internet, information came out that it was
possibly a premeditated attack. As time passed, more information was released
that showed that the government may have had information and data to suggest a
possible upcoming terrorist attack but failed to act on it. As a result, the
government used the video as a scapegoat for its failure to respond with more
security and protection for the Ambassador.
The public needs to be able to understand
and recognize what rights their government has in their personal lives.
Currently it is becoming increasingly more difficult to understand and grasp
the changes in data privacy that are occurring. In a recent interview with
Edward Snowden, he described the changes by saying “Many of the changes that are
happening are invisible because they’re happening at the engineering level.
Google encrypted the backhaul communications between their data centers to
prevent passive monitoring.” To many this would be seen as technological garble
but to Snowden these are small steps in the road to privacy. Does the
government really need that information?
On May 13, 2015, the House of Representatives
passed the USA Freedom Act by a vote if 338-88. Shortly after, President Obama
signed the bill into law on June 2, 2015. According to the Judiciary Committee,
the bill ends and prohibits bulk collection of all records under Section 215 of
the Patriot Act, prevents government overreach and allows for the challenges of
national security letter gag orders. This was considered one of the major laws
regarding collection of data in the United States. The law was met with mixed
reviews.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky stated "I cannot support passage of
the so-called USA Freedom Act," he said. "It does not enhance the
privacy protections of American citizens, and it surely undermines American
security by taking one more tool from our war fighters, in my view, at exactly
the wrong time." On the other side of the conversation, ACLU deputy legal director Jameel Jaffer said in a
statement. "This is the most important surveillance reform bill since
1978, and its passage is an indication that Americans are no longer willing to
give the intelligence agencies a blank check” What exactly did this bill do in
terms of surveillance reform?
In terms of protection
of privacy for the everyday American, it did not do much. The government still
can access your data with little to no restriction. Despite this, private
companies are becoming more aware and conscious of data and the importance of
privacy. One of the newest developments in privacy came just very recently,
after another terrorist attack took place on American soil. On December 2nd,
2015 an attack at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California left
14 people killed and 22 seriously injured. This was the result of a mass
shooting an attempting bombing by a married couple, Syed Rizwan Farook and
Tashfeen Malik. This couple had been living in the area for some time and had
been described by the FBI as “radicalized over time”. The husband had posted
and committed to jihadism through private messages over the internet. Out of
this horrific tragedy came a new direction in the role of government and
privacy.
Apple, one of
the most influential private companies in the world and producer of the iPhone,
became engaged in a legal debate regarding a recovered phone from one of the
terrorists. In an attempt to gain more information about the attack, the
government reached out to Apple in order to help unlock the phone. The phone,
which was encrypted preventing data from being recovered, was only able to be
unlocked by Apple. Apple refused stating that they could not undermine the security
of the applications and that a government had never set a precedent for such
actions. As a result, Apple opposed the order and faced a judge issued court
order to unlock the phone.
Eventually, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation was able to unlock the phone through backdoor
methods through collaboration with third parties. Apple’s CEO Tim Cook released
a statement on their view on privacy stating “Finally, I want to be absolutely
clear that we have never worked with any government agency from any country to
create a backdoor in any of our products or services. We have also never
allowed access to our servers. And we never will.” This is a very important
change in policy from private companies. From the start of the modern
technological age, private companies have for the most part been on board with
the decisions governments have made in terms of what is best for the public and
how their data is handled. This strong stance against the demands made by the
United States government have set a precedent that supports the personal user’s
privacy more than the governments need for their information.
Many private
companies are beginning to emphasize their privacy policies in order to have a
more open conversation with the public in terms of their methods of collecting
data and how they use them. Microsoft recently changed their privacy policy to
further clarify how they use your personal data. It states “Microsoft uses the
data we collect to provide you the services we offer, which includes using data
to improve and personalize your experiences. We also may use the data to
communicate with you, for example, informing you about your account, security
updates and product information. And we use data to help make the ads we show
you more relevant to you. However, we do not use what you say in email, chat,
video calls or voice mail, or your documents, photos or other personal files to
target ads to you.” This is a stark change since the first discussion of
Microsoft in their role with Edward Snowden and the Prism collection program. Their
policy goes on to say that they do share your data as well. However there are
undoubtedly changes that still need to be made. Yahoo’s privacy policy states
“Your personal information may be transferred to countries other than your own
to process and store data in accordance with our Privacy Policy and to provide
you with products and services. Some of these countries may not have the same
data protection safeguards as the country where you reside”. This does not
appear to be a very good way to ensure data is protected.
In the end, one
of the major keys to developing and protecting privacy rights stems from
knowledge of what information is being collected, to what extent, and how it is
being used. In a world where increased technology allows for more information
to be delivered faster than ever it is essential that is it moderated. With
this moderation comes responsibility however, and in order to maintain a line
between safety and privacy an open discussion between the public, government
and private companies must remain the first priority.
Gellman, Barton. "Edward Snowden, After Months Of NSA Revelations, Says His Mission’S Accomplished". Washington Post. N.p., 2016. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
