(Editor's Note :. The following is a guest blog Nuala O'Connor, president and CEO at center for Democracy and technology originally appeared on CDT's website, October 8, 2014. Golden Frog is a member of the CDT, an organization that fights for civil liberties and overall online rights man. It works to drive policy outcomes that keep the Internet open, innovative and free).
Nuala O'Connor
President and CEO of the Center for Democracy & Technology
Smartphones have become the archives of our lives. Family photos and calendars financial records and medical information, cell phones not only serve as communication devices but are instead a global repository of both the intimate details and the most mundane trivialities our lives. They often lay beside us as we sleep, and remain near us all day, an integral part of our navigation of the world online and offline.
The fact that our phones are also vehicles for commercial services that run on a fuel of our personal data can be easy to forget, and many users are not aware of security vulnerabilities on devices that open backdoors to outside interference.
It is critical that users demand the highest level of security to both protect our privacy and mitigate the potential damage that can result from personal data theft. In response to these concerns, Apple and Google recently made headlines by announcing that smartphones would encrypt the content stored on all default phones. Personal data has become a valuable currency on the black market, and victims of identity theft that the data is often much more valuable to a criminal as the device that holds the.
Law enforcement officials, including FBI Director James Comey, did not welcome this announcement. Instead of recognizing that strengthening the Smartphone security better protects hundreds of millions of people in the world, they consider it a threat to obtaining evidence in criminal investigations and called Apple and Google to reverse their policy.
Unquestionably, encrypt the contents of smartphones makes it more difficult access to this information; That's the point. However, there are still many legal Police tract may continue to access encrypted data. For example, much of the data stored on smartphones, including e-mails and phone records are also stored in the cloud. This information could also be obtained with a warrant. In addition, there is a legal precedent in some jurisdictions that the courts may order the owner of a cell phone to unlock the phone. A recent decision of the Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement needs a search warrant to examine smartphones, so a request to compel the release is hardly an unreasonable extra burden.
The basic tension of this debate is to balance the need for better access to the government with a long tradition of individual autonomy and privacy of our country. When the government calls for reduced security on smartphones, or worse still, seeks technological backdoors in our devices, we are asked to expose our personal information to criminals. Any backdoor government can walk to uncover evidence will eventually be used by malicious actors to exploit our personal information.
The data breaches at major retailers such as Target and Home Depot, as well as the really dangerous security vulnerabilities heartbleed and Shellshock, illustrate how easily criminals exploit vulnerabilities. The technology community should work with law enforcement to find security flaws and correct them.
In addition, shocking revelations of pervasive government surveillance programs last year have shaken people's confidence in their governments worldwide. Since these companies are working to restore customer confidence in digital communication systems, a shift towards a reinforced protection against government intrusion is necessary and justified.
default smartphones Encryption is just a part of what is needed to improve the security of our personal information stored electronically. Much of the data stored in the cloud by enterprises is not fully protected against government surveillance because of deficiencies in the Act on the Protection of electronic communications, a law written in the low-tech world of 1986. In addition, legislation to reform the supervision of the government, including the US FREEDOM Act, around the most invasive programs of the national security Agency has been locked in a do-nothing Congress. These reforms should be adopted.
Ultimately, we are much safer, individually and as a nation, if we are entitled to control the security and confidentiality of our own information. As we store more and more personal data in our smartphones, we must have the ability to protect against hackers and sophisticated criminals. The vision of the Government of National Security where only the good guys exploit weak security is not realistic nor scalable globally. We should applaud companies that take positive steps to improve the security of our personal information and to encourage businesses to be just as bold.
About the author
Nuala O'Connor is president and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology. She is an internationally recognized expert in Internet and technology policy, particularly in the areas of privacy and information governance. Nuala is passionate about technology and the means of the Internet can be instruments of global free expression and individual freedom, and is determined to find political solutions that affect real people. You can follow on Twitter at Nuala @PrivacyMama
0 Komentar