Discussion: Privacy

[Becky]

The subject of privacy seems to feature in the news most days now, so I thought it would be an interesting debate topic here. Anyone using the internet will have had data gathered on them for one reason or another, and indeed personal data is big business nowadays. Companies and governments gather as much information as they can about people, and don't always protect that data as well as they should. This data is also worth a great deal and is bought and sold on the market place like any other commodity. Too many people either accept that privacy violations are now part of daily life, or aren't aware that their privacy is being violated in the first place.

Some questions to get things started:

• What constitutes a privacy violation?
• Should we just accept that we lose privacy by using the internet?
• Is it fair that our data is gathered, bought and sold?
• Under what conditions is it ok?
• If you don't have anything to hide, then surely it's ok?
• What can you do to protect your privacy online?

 

[floppybootstomp]

The data gathering (stealing) mostly applies to Mac and Windows OS's though it occurs in Linux through third party software and apps.

For myself, I don't receive a great deal of spam and any cold callers simply get told to **** off. Really.

If I was that bothered about privacy I'd employ a free or paid-for VPN.

I'm aware I have data gathered from me online but I don't accept that 'If you have nothing to hide then it's ok' line, not at all. It's like taking a shower in the middle of Trafalgar Square. I think police and security forces should have the power to eavesdrop where they suspect criminal or terrorist activity but this should be subject to a warrant being granted, similar to property search warrants.

All told, it doesn't bother me too much as people trying to flog me stuff I neither need nor want get very short and very abusive thrift from me.

 

[Becky]

Agreed. I think data privacy needs to be taken more seriously, and if companies want to sell your data there should be an upfront opt-out, not something hidden in the T&Cs.

I agree that governments should be able to monitor individuals suspected of criminal / terrorist activity, but when they talk about wanting back doors for access that's just asking for trouble.

Anyone here watched the film Snowden?

 

[bootneck02]

That was one of the reasons I downloaded Linux Mint and only use Linux, because of the adverts via Microsoft I also StartPage search engine, because using the usual engines because of the adverts. What ever you search for your Internet provider will have records of your searches, so are available to the police should they require to look at your search habits, but they will require a search warrant, but that will change soon because of security. I have no doubt the security services by various means are able monitor as and when required because of the security issues of this modern world.

 

[floppybootstomp]

I haven't see Snowden yet but it did catch my attention.

Fact is, in the greater majority of the worlds nations, if the spooks want to check you out, they will.

And maybe that's a good thing.

 

[Quadophile]

Data breach is another thing these days which is very common. Big companies who have your information and a great deal of it like banks, and government agencies who you interact with are also vulnerable. Many times it has been reported that a data breach has occured and all your info is with the hackers who then sell that valubale info in the market place. There is no such thing "safe place in the cyberspace"

 

[Abarbarian]

If anyone thinks that there is such a thing as a "private" life then they must be living on a different planet.
If you are living in the UK you have no freedom and no legal right to it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...eillance-becomes-uk-law-with-barely-a-whimper

Saturday 19 November 2016 07.00 GMT

A bill giving the UK intelligence agencies and police the most sweeping surveillance powers in the western world has passed into law with barely a whimper, meeting only token resistance over the past 12 months from inside parliament and barely any from outside.

The Investigatory Powers Act, passed on Thursday, legalises a whole range of tools for snooping and hacking by the security services unmatched by any other country in western Europe or even the US.

The security agencies and police began the year braced for at least some opposition, rehearsing arguments for the debate. In the end, faced with public apathy and an opposition in disarray, the government did not have to make a single substantial concession to the privacy lobby.

The Investigatory Powers Act legalises powers that the security agencies and police had been using for years without making this clear to either the public or parliament. In October, the investigatory powers tribunal, the only court that hears complaints against MI6, MI5 and GCHQ, ruled that they had been unlawfully collecting massive volumes of confidential personal data without proper oversight for 17 years.

One of the few positives in the legislation is that it sets out clearly for the first time the surveillance powers available to the intelligence services and the police. It legalises hacking by the security agencies into computers and mobile phones and allows them access to masses of stored personal data, even if the person under scrutiny is not suspected of any wrongdoing.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ttacks-plans-to-extend-dragnet-of-secrecy-act

“It seems to me that we are living in an increasingly unfree society. The government and its intelligence and security apparatus have amassed ever broader and deeper powers through legislation like the Justice and Security Act 2013 and the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. These laws enable it to survey all private communications and online activity, carry out bulk collection and storage of data, hack private devices, detain and interrogate at whim and demand CMP [closed material procedures] in court, preventing evidence and information from being disclosed in the interest of national security.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Communications_Headquarters

GCHQ also has had access to the US internet monitoring programme PRISM since at least June 2010.[54] PRISM is said to give the National Security Agency and FBI easy access to the systems of nine of the world's top internet companies, including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, and Skype.[55]

In 2015, another secret program called Karma Police was revealed by Snowden.[62] The same year GCHQ has admitted for the first time in court that it conducts computer hacking.[63]

It was further reported in 2015 that British intelligence services, including GCHQ, had been spying on MPs in defiance of laws prohibiting it.[94] GCHQ had introduced a policy in March 2015 that did not require approval by the Prime Minister, or any Minister, before deliberately targeting the communications of a parliamentarian. This is despite then-Home Secretary, Theresa May, telling Parliament in 2014 that "Obviously, the Wilson doctrine applies to parliamentarians."[95]

So we live in a country that has a secret service so secret in fact that it operated outside the law with impunity for many years and now it can operate with full legal backing.
As you can see it even spied secretly on the people who are supposed to be in control of and running the country.
So do you think you live in a free and open society that holds freedom and privacy close to its heart ?

 

[bootneck02]

The right to free speech has been blasted away, I suspect that the security services have been doing this for many years without the knowledge of their political masters. But if you haven't been naughty why worry.

 

[Becky]

But if you haven't been naughty why worry.

So if you were at home, you wouldn't mind someone you don't know just watching what you were doing through your windows?

 

[bootneck02]

Unfortunately as the world is today it is something we have to put up with. I was brought up in the 40's and the 1950's and private conversations were private and the police if they wanted to intercept a letter they had to have a warrant. I worked for GPO after I left school until I went into the HMRM but now any communication over the Internet, post, mobile or telephone can be monitored without warrant or justification. Yes so it is a worry but as the world is today like or not or put up with the casual bombing by terrorists and other crimes.

P.S Depends what I was doing