[widdershins] Turning the tables on Big Brother?

[Gmx Private 01]

Turning the tables on Big Brother?

John Horvath   19.07.2004 

Is it possible to use technology to counter the erosion of privacy in 
our post 9/11 world? 

Before 9/11, many were already worried about the potential of computers 
and the Internet to erode personal privacy. That's still an issue, but 
new state powers of surveillance to combat so-called "terrorism" at 
home have now made matters a lot worse. The events of September 2001 
made the tilt in the balance between security and personal privacy more 
visible. 

These new attitudes are especially noticeable in the US, where privacy 
traditionally takes second place to freedom of commerce. However, 
within Europe member states of the European Union (EU) have also 
strengthened their defenses through collecting and sharing more 
personal information. Thus, greater snooping powers for the state have 
added to concerns about the erosion of privacy, many of which 
previously related to the private sector alone. 

Take, for example, America's proposed CAPPS II, a law which represents 
a scary example of the extent to which a government seeks control. 
According to this law, all airline passengers would be screened and 
their records would be checked against the FBI's NCIC (National Crime 
Information Center) database -- which, ironically, is exempt from 
requirements to ensure that its contents are accurate. 

While we may bemoan the relative security and freedom we felt prior to 
the advent of the Third Millennium, it must be kept in mind that 
concern about computers and privacy is not new. Large scale government 
data collection first became possible in the 1970s. State surveillance 
to counter terrorism is not new, either. The events of September 2001 
may have strengthened government mandates to use intrusive security 
measures that citizens previously might not have tolerated, but many of 
these seemingly "new measures" had previously been under discussion. 

Unfortunately, democracy is in decline in most parts of the western 
world; hence, the ability to undo the mess that politicians have made 
is severely restricted. Since it's no longer possible to change the 
system by simple political means, some have been looking to technology 
as a way to help and restore the balance that it, ironically, had 
disturbed in the first place. Along these lines, what has been proposed 
is to use technology in such a way that unites security with privacy. 

There are three main areas in which technology can be used to this 
extent. The first is what is known as "identity-related technologies". 
These are tools that help to identify ourselves in much the same way as 
passports and driving licenses validate us in the physical world. 
Central to this is the concept of Identity Management Systems (IMSs), 
which can be either under the user's direct control (on a PC or a 
mobile phone, for example) or based in a centralised location. 
Identification technologies include virtual identification processes, 
such as passwords and digital signatures, as well as physical tags like 
iris recognition, fingerprints, and even surgically implanted chips. 

The second type of identity technology is known as "location-based 
services". These relate mainly to the ability of mobile phones to 
identify the geographical movements of their users, though radio tags 
and satellite navigation systems will also play a part. Emergency 
services as well as concerned parents are already using this 
technology, and tracking accuracy is continually improving. 

Finally, the third area, "ambient intelligence space", refers to the 
ability of tomorrow's networked and sensor-laden environments to 
identify, track, and respond to individual people. Smart homes and 
offices, for instance, could control computer displays and open doors 
for people who have been identified and authorised through radio tags 
or surveillance cameras. 

Although these three areas seem to provide an alternative to the brute 
security measures now in place throughout the US and the EU, they are 
by no means foolproof and, in the final analysis, do little to redress 
the privacy concerns of individuals. Identity-related technologies have 
already been implemented in many areas; their main weakness is in the 
structure of centralised systems, for such systems are open to abuse. 
Moreover, IMSs actually differ little from what is already being done 
in the US and the EU through existing centralised databases. There is 
little or no transparency on how the stored information is handled, and 
to whom and when it is shared. 

As for location-based services, tracking accuracy constantly improves 
along with nefarious uses of the technology. Furthermore, a line is 
blurred between the notion of "tracking" and control. If the wish of 
some diehard enthusiasts of the technology is ever realised -- that is, 
we shall all have surgically implanted chips to track our movements 
starting from childhood (under the guise of child protection) -- this 
will no doubt exceed the bounds of present surveillance systems in 
place within both the US and the EU. 

Lastly, ambient intelligence spaces do little to help and restore a 
sense of privacy. As spaces become increasingly networked, there is a 
loss of distinction between what can be defined as a public space and a 
private area. Hence, the resulting blurring of the boundaries between 
personal and public spaces would require careful legal and technical 
control; however, given the present obsession with fighting terrorism 
at home and abroad, such a balance is highly unlikely to be achieved. 

In the end, Big Brother has little to worry about as the technology to 
help restore a sense of privacy is unlikely to redress the balance that 
had been lost over the past few years. New technologies can improve the 
quality of life, but they are not foolproof. Computerised systems are 
only as reliable as the people who run them. Even the tightest security 
controls may be undermined through social engineering or human 
negligence. One just has to look at the enigma of spam and the plague 
of computer viruses to see how fallible such technologies really are. 

Links 

Telepolis Artikel-URL: 
http://www.telepolis.de/english/inhalt/te/17893/1.html 

--------------------
Copyright © 1996-2004. All Rights Reserved. Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Heise Zeitschriften Verlag, Hannover