Drones, Data, and National Security in the 21st Century
Wednesday, January 21, 2015
Blog Post 5
Cyber crime is growing at a steady rate. Many companies are taking action by encrypting information such as phone calls so it would be harder for attackers to cypher the information. The use of encryption of our data limits data breaches. However, the United States wants companies to make it easier for agencies like the NSA to track individuals who are looked to be a threat to our national security. In this blog I will discuss how this will put companies and citizens at a more higher risk of data breach and how it violates our Fourth Amendment right. I will be the first to say that I agree that our government should play a major role in handling of threats of national security. However, the call for seizing our information is against our Fourth Amendment right to probable cause. The amendment violation can be a hard case to say is unconstitutional since most of the data collection happens secretly and is approved by secret courts. Also, they do not need probable cause if they receive information from a third party like internet companies. However, a lot of the data collected is domestic and as citizens of this great country we should not have our private information compromised especially since we are under an impression that our information is held private. The lack of communication to citizens of how their information is shared is a bit of concern. Most individuals are not aware of their information being collected and even if they are, they do not know to what extent. Also, on the technical side the making of information more available for government agencies can play a threat to cyber security for companies and citizens. Cyber threats are growing by the day and making data more accessible leaves an opening for black hats(evil cyber hackers) to retrieve our data.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that the fourth amendment states that they need a warrant, however, I do not think this violates the fourth amendment because the information is being collected by telephone companies in the first place. We agree to this when we choose the provider we want to use and its not being given to the government in order for them to just have it-its to maintain security. The information is already out there...what do you suggest be improved on in terms of data collection?
ReplyDeleteLamontre,
ReplyDeleteIt seems ironic to me that attempts by the NSA to collect massive amounts of user data in the name of safeguarding "national security" may have actually made it easier for cyber hackers to gain access to private information gathered by social media sites and other companies.
In regards to the Fourth Amendment, I want to direct your attention to the case Katz v. United States in which the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment should be extended to all areas where there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy".
Do you think that personal information from various websites fits into this category?
Also, I found that this summary on electronic surveillance legislation rather useful: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/electronic_surveillance
Jessica - You made a really important point that I think is along the lines of the Smith v. Maryland ruling. However, I think there are some important distinctions between the government collecting your information, and the phone company. In past decades, that metadata information was needed by the phone company so they could bill you, this is now true less often than in the past. Additionally, the government is extremely different in scope and power compared to any company. The government is responsible for creating and enforcing laws, fighting wars, and conducting surveillance among other things. A phone company does not have the ability to suppress free speech, jail or kill "threats" and manipulate a population, the government does. Surveillance is used by governments to control their citizens. I think we are taking for granted the fact that our government is not oppressive, and assuming that it never would be. However, MLK and other political dissidents have shown that the government can and will use their power for things most people would disagree with. We cannot assume that the data will always be used properly.
ReplyDelete