Tag: privacy

Categories
media and media people

Pogue Privacy “Paranoia”

Apple customers recently learned that the cellular versions of their iPhones and iPads are storing detailed tracking information about users in an unencrypted format.

Ace New York Times tech reviewer David Pogue belittles anyone concerned about the threat to privacy. He himself has “nothing to hide,” lacks the “paranoid gene.” In conclusion, “So what?”

Chiming in online, reader “Diana” avers that “Privacy is dead. It is time to get over it” — a familiar yet incoherent sentiment which assumes that privacy is an all-​or-​nothing commodity.

If there were a spate of break-​ins in a neighborhood, would anyone feel justified in blithely asserting, “Security is dead. It is time to get over it”? Would you be making a pointless fetish of security by continuing to lock your front door or improving the lock? Should everyone suffering under dictatorship be instructed that their freedom is dead, get over it?

The costs of breaching privacy can be minor or great. With respect to unencrypted and archived tracking data, the practical costs of the vulnerability may be zero until the wrong person with the wrong motive exploits it. The danger may be a lot greater in other countries.

It’s appropriate to debate how great an apparent threat to privacy may be, and the best way of countering that threat. But it is wrong to assume that institutionally persistent but unnecessary assaults on personal privacy are either irreversible or silly even to notice.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access general freedom

Sore Winners?

In 2009, Washington state voters considered a ballot question, Referendum 71, on whether to uphold a new law expanding domestic partnership rights. The referendum was the work of opponents of the controversial law; supporters, obviously, would have been happy to see it enacted without challenge.

Some 138,000 Washingtonians signed the petition to post the question. But they failed to prevent the law from taking effect: It was approved last November 53 percent to 47 percent.

Now there’s controversy about whether publicly releasing the names of petition signers can be justified in the name of transparency.

Of course, this is transparency not of government — allowing civic monitoring of power and purse — but of citizens’ political acts. Those eager to see the names mostly claim they want to make sure the signatures are valid. But with 47 percent of the electorate having voted No, is there really any doubt that opposition was widespread enough to yield the required number of petition signatures?

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that petition signers enjoy no First-​Amendment-​implied right to anonymity. But the court suggested that disclosure of the petitioners’ names might be blocked on the grounds of a plausible threat that signers would be harassed, as some foes of the law have been already.

So a group called Protect Marriage Washington has secured a court order to keep the names sealed until it can argue in court that intimidation of petition signers is indeed likely.

Stay tuned.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
too much government

Who “YouTubes” You, and Why

Government agencies now store nude pictures of you.

Well, if you travel on the major airlines out of some major airports, they do.

When the Transportation Security Administration began using full-​body scanning at select airports — with devices such as the backscatter X‑ray machine, which can show every lovely and unlovely fold (if not freckle) on your body — officials rushed to defend their practice of peering at us under our clothing. It was only for our safety. Besides, the images were made only for immediate viewing. They weren’t even stored. 

Why, they couldn’t be stored!

We learned this week how wrong that was. The U.S. Marshals Service has been secretly storing thousands and thousands of the images. Furthermore, specifications for some devices even require that they send the images over networks.

Once again, government folk have lied to us.

There’s no evidence that anyone’s been blackmailed based on the images. But you have to think of privacy dangers in the fourth dimension, time. Can we trust people in future governments with our intimate details as unforeseen crises come to the fore? As new personnel gain access to the archives? As tomorrow’s politicians pledge (and routinely break) their oaths of office?

We wear clothing to select who will see us naked. Taking that prerogative away, in the name of security, and giving it to people we do not know?

That’s transparently foolish. And unsafe.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

Smash Hack Attacks

Add one more news story to all the others about how your private data is not secure in any database.

In May, a gang of hackers demanded $10 million ransom in exchange for not posting the personal information of millions of Virginia residents on the Internet. 

Yikes, I’m from Virginia!

The Virginia Department of Health Professions confirms that there was indeed a recent breach of its servers.

If marauders get your name, birthday, and social security number, they can make life a living hell for you. Some of these jokers commit crimes in the name of the identity they stole. Guess who ends up getting arrested.

No, the databases are not secure. Still, Big Brother keeps trying to compel us to stick all our private data in one huge database to be tethered to a national ID card. The latest approach is to require all state ID cards to follow federal data and biometric protocols. And then link every state database together until it’s all one big database. The fate of this federal project is uncertain, since — thank goodness — some state governments are refusing to play along. But the feds will keep trying.

If the government succeeds, cyber terrorists would need to pull off only one big hack attack to jeopardize the privacy and security of every card-​carrying American. 

I’m against being forced to be a sitting duck. How about you?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.