Privacy versus Security: Rights in Conflict
Citizens hold rights to both privacy and security. Through cell-phones and other media, private
information is always circulated. Some of the information can and have been used by the
government agencies to ensure security. Because exact processes and association between
“justified” violations to privacy and security are unknown, we often feel uncomfortable about
our private information being exposed. But what does individual privacy mean if citizens are not
protected from physical threats? Is it necessary for government to utilize mass surveillance and
encryption to protect its citizens?
Apple’s recent refusal to comply with a court to help the FBI unlock Syed Farook’s iphone has
sparked heated debate. Some experts argued that Apple’s compliance would enhance security,
since the device might give information about the other malefactors, allowing government to
investigate and prevent further harm. Others have also suggested that this one exception has a
danger to open up doors to the threats posed by cybercriminals and enemy government. Further,
exception made to Farook’s iphone can have international implications because more repressive
governments such as Russia and China can be justified in demanding technology companies to
unlock devices.
This issue can be traced back to post-Paris ISIS attack, Snowden case, and even back to Bush
Administration after 911 terrors. This issue is not only ethical, but also international, political,
and cultural debate. In this blog, I wish to compare history, development, and culture of mass
surveillance and other threats to privacy in the United States and Russia to gain a better
understanding of international security.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/17/apple-fbi-encryption-san-bernardino-
russia-china
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/20/balancing_privacy_security_amid_isis_th
reat_128788.html
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/12/privacy-watchdog-attacks-snoopers-
charter-encryption