- Jun 24, 2016
- 636
Surveillance & Big-Data Vs Security & Privacy:
Writing of cyber attacks,Phillip Bobbitt author of "The Shield of Achilles" & "The Garments of Court and Palace", notes that by “virtually abolishing civil privacy or by increasing surveillance and intelligence gathering,” countries can defend themselves but with “profound constitutional consequences.”..
SOURCE: newsok.com (ARTICLE DATE: 28th Aug 2016)
Online privacy and freedom worth fighting for:
SOURCE: mississauga.com (ARTICLE DATE: 16th Aug 2016)
Earlier this week Canada’s police chiefs passed a resolution calling for laws that force people to provide their computer passwords with a judge’s consent.
A license to access the web? No more anonymity online for whistleblowers, people looking up medical information, anyone speaking out against their government? If it sounds a bit Orwellian, that’s because it most assuredly carries not-so-subtle undertones of Big Brother monitoring our every move.
A free and self-governing society is part of the foundation of a healthy democracy. These are cherished values that must be carefully preserved from the invasion of government authority, which includes law enforcement. Such freedoms should be limited only in rare occasions and with great reluctance.
A requirement to hand over passwords, particularly when a judge’s consent is required, seems in keeping with existing laws around search and seizure warrants. But that is only one of many requests law enforcement agencies have (or likely will) make. The conversation about police access is far more complex than simply having a court order someone to provide a digital key to a specific device. And the impact on our long established and valued rights could be far reaching...
Security through surveillance? & The privacy-security paradox:
SOURCE: lifehacker.com.au (ARTICLE DATE: 29th Jul 2016)
Australian laws allow the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) to infiltrate computer networks. Other new laws require internet service providers (ISPs) to retain metadata for two years.
A range of government agencies enjoy access without warrant, including many unrelated to criminal justice or national security.
..questions remain about the success of blanket surveillance programs. There is currently no evidence to indicate this actually increases security.
We know surveillance can be effective under narrow conditions, but only for specific crimes. Collecting too much information can also be a barrier to effective intelligence systems.
Recent terrorist attacks in Paris reveal how data retention programs that attempt to identify every possible threat are not failsafe. Security agencies become overwhelmed with data. Collecting as much information as possible about as many people as possible may be positively harmful.
Significant resources are being spent on strategies with questionable efficacy. These strategies impact privacy, provoke opposition and create new challenges to overcome.
Leading academics argue security interests will always outweigh individual rights. But encroaching on the privacy of all internet users just antagonises hacktivists and inspires further development and use of tools to enhance privacy.
The security versus privacy trade-off becomes a self-defeating paradox...
Big-Data vs. Privacy- the big balancing act:
SOURCE: information-age.com
Many organisations have started to really capitalise on their investments in analytics, data collection and storage.
In 2016, it’s a market worth around $40 billion, and projected to reach $66.8 billion by 2021...
Major breaches have never been more frequent or their impact greater. The hauls of data thieves now commonly reach in the millions, such as in the case of the LinkedIn data breach, which affected 117 million, or the attack on US retailer Target in 2013 that saw the data of 110 million customers exposed.
The volumes involved in big data analysis mean that accessing an organisation’s big data repository can provide bigger returns for cyber criminals in one fell swoop, and the implications for the business from a regulatory and trust point of view
can be severe.
Many consumers are wising up to the potential security threats that are out there, with many expressing fears about what is happening to their personal data. The issue for businesses is that this has not had an impact on their action.
‘BehavioSec’s report on digital behaviour discovered that 21% have shared their phone password and 10% even admit to sharing online banking details with people they know,’ says Neil Costigan, CEO of biometric security firm BehavioSec. ‘Consequently, it isn’t that the security mechanism is broken – it is only as secure as consumers’ willingness to protect it.’..
Writing of cyber attacks,Phillip Bobbitt author of "The Shield of Achilles" & "The Garments of Court and Palace", notes that by “virtually abolishing civil privacy or by increasing surveillance and intelligence gathering,” countries can defend themselves but with “profound constitutional consequences.”..
SOURCE: newsok.com (ARTICLE DATE: 28th Aug 2016)
Online privacy and freedom worth fighting for:
SOURCE: mississauga.com (ARTICLE DATE: 16th Aug 2016)
Earlier this week Canada’s police chiefs passed a resolution calling for laws that force people to provide their computer passwords with a judge’s consent.
A license to access the web? No more anonymity online for whistleblowers, people looking up medical information, anyone speaking out against their government? If it sounds a bit Orwellian, that’s because it most assuredly carries not-so-subtle undertones of Big Brother monitoring our every move.
A free and self-governing society is part of the foundation of a healthy democracy. These are cherished values that must be carefully preserved from the invasion of government authority, which includes law enforcement. Such freedoms should be limited only in rare occasions and with great reluctance.
A requirement to hand over passwords, particularly when a judge’s consent is required, seems in keeping with existing laws around search and seizure warrants. But that is only one of many requests law enforcement agencies have (or likely will) make. The conversation about police access is far more complex than simply having a court order someone to provide a digital key to a specific device. And the impact on our long established and valued rights could be far reaching...
[To read the full article please visit mississauga.com]
Security through surveillance? & The privacy-security paradox:
SOURCE: lifehacker.com.au (ARTICLE DATE: 29th Jul 2016)
Australian laws allow the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) to infiltrate computer networks. Other new laws require internet service providers (ISPs) to retain metadata for two years.
A range of government agencies enjoy access without warrant, including many unrelated to criminal justice or national security.
..questions remain about the success of blanket surveillance programs. There is currently no evidence to indicate this actually increases security.
We know surveillance can be effective under narrow conditions, but only for specific crimes. Collecting too much information can also be a barrier to effective intelligence systems.
Recent terrorist attacks in Paris reveal how data retention programs that attempt to identify every possible threat are not failsafe. Security agencies become overwhelmed with data. Collecting as much information as possible about as many people as possible may be positively harmful.
Significant resources are being spent on strategies with questionable efficacy. These strategies impact privacy, provoke opposition and create new challenges to overcome.
Leading academics argue security interests will always outweigh individual rights. But encroaching on the privacy of all internet users just antagonises hacktivists and inspires further development and use of tools to enhance privacy.
The security versus privacy trade-off becomes a self-defeating paradox...
[To read the full article please visit lifehacker.com.au]
Big-Data vs. Privacy- the big balancing act:
SOURCE: information-age.com
Many organisations have started to really capitalise on their investments in analytics, data collection and storage.
In 2016, it’s a market worth around $40 billion, and projected to reach $66.8 billion by 2021...
Major breaches have never been more frequent or their impact greater. The hauls of data thieves now commonly reach in the millions, such as in the case of the LinkedIn data breach, which affected 117 million, or the attack on US retailer Target in 2013 that saw the data of 110 million customers exposed.
The volumes involved in big data analysis mean that accessing an organisation’s big data repository can provide bigger returns for cyber criminals in one fell swoop, and the implications for the business from a regulatory and trust point of view
can be severe.
Many consumers are wising up to the potential security threats that are out there, with many expressing fears about what is happening to their personal data. The issue for businesses is that this has not had an impact on their action.
‘BehavioSec’s report on digital behaviour discovered that 21% have shared their phone password and 10% even admit to sharing online banking details with people they know,’ says Neil Costigan, CEO of biometric security firm BehavioSec. ‘Consequently, it isn’t that the security mechanism is broken – it is only as secure as consumers’ willingness to protect it.’..
[To read the full article please visit information-age.com]
[IMAGE: wikimedia.org (reuse permitted)]
[IMAGE: wikimedia.org (reuse permitted)]
[IMAGE: wikimedia.org (reuse permitted)]
