Google and US Government's Hacking Debate: Privacy and the user

Article Link: Google and US Government's Hacking Debate
Article Headline:

Google warns of US government 'hacking any facility' in the world

Tagline: 'Google says increasing the FBI’s powers set out in search warrants would raise ‘monumental’ legal concerns that should be decided by Congress'  

This article outlines how Google are opposing an attempt by the US Justice Department to have power to search and seize digital data.

FBI agents would have the power to carry our covert raids on servers no matter where they were situated, giving the US Government ultimate control to access private information on a global scale. As it stands, Federal agents have to be in the same district as a property in order to search it, but this may be abolished, if the Government breach privacy issues and enable computers to be hacked into, anytime and anywhere.  

Even though Google oppose this, 'The FBI argues that this new power would be essential in investigations where suspects have concealed the location of their computer networks.' It would allow more criminals to be caught which is a good thing, however, at the moment breaking privacy restrictions, ultimately means agents would be breaking the law themselves.  

What the article uncovers:

• 'The FBI has been developing its computer surveillance techniques over almost 15 years, (allowing)...agents to control the machine – they can turn on or off cameras and recording equipment, download the entire database of information and gain access to other linked computers.' Google draw attention that these 'tactics run the risk of the private information of innocent third parties being hoovered up in a massive data sweep'.
• Google argues that by changing privacy laws the 'US government risks undermining diplomatic arrangements it has built up with other countries over many years that allow cross-border investigations to take place with the approval of all parties.'
• However, to backlash this, FBI director James Comey suggests that, “encryption threatens to lead us all to a very, very dark place”.
• Instead he asks this question: “Have we become so mistrustful of government and law enforcement in particular that we are willing to let bad guys walk away, willing to leave victims in search of justice?”

What I think:

I think the content of this article raises the new and upcoming technological panic of privacy and misused information that all technology users are at risk of.

Anyone on social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, face the privacy settings option, in which the user decides who can view their profile. However, does the user really have the control? Arguably, once something is uploaded onto a social networking site even if you delete it, the information has never fully gone away. For example, even if you delete a photo off Facebook, the institution themselves still have access to it on their system. Obviously, one could argue this isn't such as big deal. Facebook has millions upon millions of users, so one photo we deleted that we didn't like, isn't such a big deal right? But of course the wider debate is more of an issue. Information we put on these sites has the ability to end up in the wrong person's hands years later. Childhood conversations could end up haunting people in the public eye years on from happening. Maybe the content of this information again isn't what's important - but the panic around control and privacy is significant. 

Nothing seems an issue until it directly affects us, and thinking someone could be viewing intended private information on your profile is quite startling. If someone came up to you on the street and asked for a photo of you, we'd all say no, but we allow this to happen online everyday. It's come to our attention that we're not in the control of information once we've posted it. Once it's online it's online for good.

Linking this to the article I think it's true that privacy restrictions is an ongoing debate. From one perspective, allowing access to any computer, can like the FBI argue, catch more criminals and hopefully reduce hacking crimes, but it opens up a huge issue of rights to personal information. It's not just the criminals who are being watched but it's everyone. People go online to interact, learn and be entertained, not be watched by unwanted eyes and monitors. 

However, again it could be argued that this element of control is already under way. Institutions already monitor our interacting habits and alter accordingly. For example, Facebook advertise products that match our profiles and our recent searches. And it's not just Facebook. For example, YouTube too tailor their advertising to what we have been recently searching, providing us with similar searches and what they 'recommend' from our views. So, the issue of control and privacy has already left our hands; I just wonder whose hands they are entering.