1

MasonLopez
BrandonStillwell
AnnalisaLopez
DanielPesqueda
Whatisprivacy?
Thebeliefthatprivacyisasecurerightthatallcitizensareentitledtoisnowathoughtof
thepast.AsAmitaiEtzionistatesinTheLimitsofPrivacy,privacyisundersiegeprivacyis
indeedundersiege,perhapsevencompromised(1999).Theideaofprivacycanoftenbecomea
doublestandard,howeverthisdoublestandardwillnevertrulydogood.Etzioniasksthereader
whetherornottheywouldwanttoknowiftheirneighborhadpedopheliatendenciesbasedonhis
phonecallsoronliesusesoriftheemployersattheconvalescenthomehadarecordofelderly
abuse.Toallthesequestionstherewouldbeaunanimousyes.Thediminishmentofprivacyis
forthecommongoodtopointfingersandsaynoteveryoneshouldbemonitoredisfartoo
skepticaltobedone.
TheLawsforprivacyareoutdatedandareinneedofmodernization.TheElectronic
CommunicationPrivacyActwasestablishedin1986andhasverylittlesubstanceintodays
advancedtechnologicalsociety.Thisactallowsthegovernmenttherighttohavepersonal
electronicfilessuchas:emails,facebookmessages,publiccloudfilesandmanyotherfiles.This
Actallowsthegovernmenttoobtainthesefileswithoutawarrantifthefilehasbeeninaninbox
foronehundredandeightydays.Therehasbeenanongoingbattletochangetheselawsbasedon
todayssocietybutleadtoafailedattemptin2012.HowevertheSenatehassincefiledanupdate
ontheActinMarchof2013sothebattlewillcontinue(2013).Thecontinuousneedforchange

inlawsprotectingcitizensprivacywillbeanecessityaslongastechnologycontinuestogrowin
thefuture.
PersonalConceptsofPrivacy:
DanielsPersonalConceptsofprivacy:
Mypersonalconceptsofprivacyareprobablymoreastringentincomparisontomany
millennials,duetomybackgroundincomputerscienceandsecurity.Ibelievethatpersonal
informationshouldonlybedisclosedwhenabsolutelynecessaryforexampleagovernment
documentorbillofsale.Iwouldneverrecommendforanyonetogiveanypersonalinformation
onlinetonongovernmentalagenciessuchasFacebook,Twitter,Google.Thesesameprinciples
thatIsetformyselfonlinealsocrossoverintothephysicalworld.Ialsobelievenogovernment
hastherighttointrudeonaperson'sprivacywithoutconsentnorshouldtheybeabletocensor
theinternetorhinderpeoplefromexercisingtheirfreespeechonline.Onecouldlooktowards
Chinaforexamplesofcensorshipandmanipulationofmediabothonlineandoffline.Itisalso
wellknownthattheChinesegovernmentmonitorscellularcommunicationsregularly.These
examplesaredesecrationsofprivacyandleavehumanstreatedlikemereobjectstodissectas
theyplease.AlthoughitmayseemthatIamagainstsurveillance,IamnotIjustsimplybelieve
thereisnoreasonwhyinnocentcitizensshouldbeintrudeduponbysystemfundedbyitspeoples
dollars.ItisalsoveryimportanttomethatIeducatemyselfonthepoliticsandpoliciesregarding
privacy.AsitisquitesimpleforgovernmententitiesliketheNSAtocreateprogramslike
PRISMthatunderminetheprivacyandsafetyofmillionsofAmericans.ThatswhyIbelieveit
isimportantforpeopletotryandstayuptodatewithpoliticssoastopreventanymore

programsorlawsbeingpassedthatcircumventournaturalrights.Theseareonlyafewofthe
thoughtsandbeliefsthatcomprisemyconceptofprivacy.
MasonsPersonalConceptsofprivacy:
CurrentlyIhaveafewstandardswhenitcomestoprivacyingeneral.Thesestandardsare
thingsthatreallyshapehowIperceiveprivacy.First,Ibelievethatnosingleperson,groupor
governmentshouldhaveunrestrictedaccesstoonespersonalinformationordatabymeansthat
canbedescribedinsomewaysasillegal.WithpropercauseIfeelthatthereareexceptionsto
thisstandardIhave,forexample,whenalawenforcementagencyisattemptingtoobtain
someonespersonaldatabecausetheyhavecommittedatrociousattacksonothers.Second,I
believethatmasssurveillanceofessentiallyanentirenationforthecauseofpreventingterrorist
attacksisabitexcessive.Iamnotsayingthatsomeformofsurveillanceisaterriblethingto
have,becausesurveillancehaspreventedhundredsofterroristtakesthatweknowof,andsome
thatwehavenotheardabout.Insomeinstances,theseprogramscanbeconsideredtobegame
changersintheeverydayfightagainstterrorism.Lastly,Ibelievethateveryone*deservesto
havesomeformofprivacywhenitcomestotheirdigitalpossessions.Idontbelievethatany
governmentorcorporationshouldhavebackdoorsorskeletonkeysforanytechdevicesthat
containpersonal,privateinformation.ButIdonotbelievethatthetermeveryoneexpandsto
peoplethathavecommittedcrimesrelatedtoterrorismorinvolvethetakingofanotherhumans
life.Withthatbeingsaid,maybetherecouldbeaskeletonkeydevelopedforextremelyrare
caseswhereaccessisabsolutelyessentialtoaninvestigationintothesetypesofcrimes.
AnnalisasPersonalConceptsofprivacy:

Astechnologygrowsithasbecomemoredifficulttoknowthelineofprivacy.Personally
thereisafinelinebetweentheprivacyweareentitledtoasAmericansandtheprivacywecan
lose.Nocompanyorgovernmentshouldhaveanunlimitedamountofaccesstopersonaldata.
Theinformationisjustthat,personalandshouldbekeptthatway.Possessionslikephonesand
laptopshaverighttoprivacyregardlessofthecontentsonthedevice.Howeverthatbeingsaid
forthosewhohavecommittedacrimelosetheserights.Thesameascriminalsloosetherightto
voteorownafirearm.TheprivacyActthatwascreatedin1974wasputinplacetoprotect
citizensfromthemisuseandcollectionofpersonalinformation.Thisactisonlyvalidifthe
informationisunderasystemofrecordswhichmeansthattheinformationathandisfound
throughaname,identifyingnumberorsymbolofapersonitisaninvasionofprivacy.The
PrivacyActalsoincludes,
Therighttoseerecordsaboutoneself,subjecttoPrivacyActexemptions
Therighttorequesttheamendmentofrecordsthatarenotaccurate,relevant,timelyor
completeandTherightofindividualstobeprotectedagainstunwarrantedinvasionof
theirprivacyresultingfromthecollection,maintenance,use,anddisclosureofpersonal
information(2016).
Ihaveanissuewithwebsitesandsearchenginescollectionanddistributingmy
information.Istillamalittlewearyabouttheissuebutifthewebsiteinformsmethenthereisno
issuebecauseitgivesmethechoicetouseanotherwebsitewhodoesnotsharemyinformation.
BrandonsPersonalConceptsofprivacy:

Ibelievethatprivacyisaseriousmatterandsomeformsofitshouldnotbe

violatedbythegovernmentandotheragencies.Withthespreadofterrorism,privacyhasbecome

anissuebecausesomebelievethatitshouldbegivenupinordertoprotectus.Iamallforgiving
upsomerightsinordertobeprotected,butnotall.ThePatriotActforexampleallowedforthe
governmenttoaccesspersonalinformationandtapintophonecallstocounteractterrorism.It
seemedlikeagoodideaatthetimebutitdidntwork:FBIagentscantpointtoanymajor
terrorismcasestheyvecrackedthankstothekeysnoopingpowersinthePatriotAct(Ybarra
2015).Thegovernmentshouldnothavefreereigntosnoopthroughthepeoplesprivatedata
becausewhattheyarefindingisnotwhatthePatriotActwasdesignedfor.Inthemodernworld,
wealreadylackmuchofourprivacybecauseofthingslikesocialmediawhereweareconstantly
postingourwhereaboutsandairingoutourpersonalfrustrationsforfriendsandfamilytosee.
Facebook,Twitterandotherformsofsocialmediashouldbemonitoredbecauseterroristsuse
thesetospreadtheirpropagandaandmonitoringthemcouldbeusefulinthefightagainst
terrorism.Unlesstheaccountsaresetonprivate,thenanyonecanalreadyviewwhatisposted.
Sothelittlebitofprivacywehaveleftshouldnotbeintrudeduponunlessitisvoluntarilygiven
uporundercertaincircumstances.SoiftheFBIweretofindsomeevidencethatwouldlead
themtosuspecttherewasanycriminalactivitygoingon,thentheyshouldhavetoaskfora
warrantandthenbeallowedtoaccesspersonalinformationandeventhesesocialmedia
accounts.Alsoifapersonalisacriminal,theylosemostoftheirrightsautomaticallysoprivacy
shouldalsobeonethatislost.Whichinmostcasesitis.TheSanBernardinoterroristsfor
example,lostalloftheirprivacyfortheircriminalactions.Theonlybitthattheyhaveleftison
aniPhonethattheFBIiswarrantedaccessto,butitcoulddamagethesecurityofalliPhoneusers
worldwidesoApplehasdeclinedtohelp.Iftherewasawaytoaccessthisphonethatisnt
consequentialtoeveryiPhoneuser,thenIbelievetheyhavetherighttoaccessthisprivatearea

oftheirlives.SoIbelievethatthegovernmentandtheiragenciesshouldnotbeallowedfree
reigntohavefullaccesstowhateverinformationthattheywantunlesstheyfullysuspectthat
theyaregoingtofindsomethingthatwillbebeneficialtotheircause.Eventhentheyshouldseek
awarranttobeabletoacquirethisinformation.
Comparing/Contrastingwithpolitical/regionaldifferences:
SynopsisofClick
InthebookClickbyBillTancerexploresthehowsocietyasawholeusestheinternet
andhowthatusealsoaffectsthewaywelearn.Societysonlinebehaviorhascontinuously
grownandthedifferenttypesofbehaviordependingonthesites.ForexampleinJuly22,2006
therewasapoweroutageatthemymainsiteforMySpaceawellknownsocialmediasite.Users
wereoutragedandatalossofwhattodowiththeirfreetime.Tancercreditsthistoanaddiction
ofthissocialmediasite.FortherestoftheweekTancerandhisteammonitoredtheinternet
activitybysiteandcategory,whileMySpacewasdown.Theinterestingoutcomeofthis
monitoringwastheincreaseinsearchesindatingsitesaswelladultsites.Thesetwosearches
werenotaspopularinthepreviousyearsbecauseofthepopularityofsocialmediasites.Tancer
believesthereasonforthediminishmentinthosesearchesisbecausethelackofnecessity.As
Tancerstatesinchapter1thatsocialmediasiteslikeMySpaceandFacebookhavethesame
capabilityofdatingsitesandpornsites(2009).
Libertarian
Fromtheviewpointofalibertariantheywouldbeincompletedisagreementwith
governmententitieswhetheritbestateorfederalaggregatingtheirpersonalprivateinformation
withouttheirconsent.Evenifitcametobethatthelibertarianwasputundercircumstances

(coercedinto)toobligewithagovernmentorcorporationsorderstheywouldbereluctantto
forfeittheirrights.Theywouldalsostatethatonlytheyhavetherighttoallowforgovernments
andcorporationstoaccesstheirpersonalinformationandthereshouldneverbeatimewhere
governmentsorthirdpartiesactautonomouslytoretrieveaperson'sinformationthroughany
meanselectronicallyorphysically.
Communitarian
Intheperspectiveofacommunitariantheywouldbelievethatthereshouldbesomewhat
ofabalancebetweenone'srightsandthewelfareofasociety.Thisisoneofthefundamental
beliefswithinCommunitarianisminregardstoindividualrightsandsocialresponsibilitiesasit
affectsthecommongood.Oppositetotheargumentofthelibertarian,communitarianswouldsay
thatanyandallpersonaldatathatispublicallyaccessibletothirdpartyentitiesshouldbe
accessibleforagovernmenttouseastheyplease.Furthermore,whilsttherighttopersonal
libertyisgiventoallcitizensinAmerica,thesafetyandsecurityfallsontheshouldersofthe
governmentandifneedmaycircumventtheserightsfortheprotectionofitspeople.Thisvoiding
ofrightsisjustifiableintheeyesofacommunitarianasitprovidessafetyandsecurityforthe
wholeof
TheInfluenceofthePast
Comparingmyideasofprivacytotheideasofthosethatwereheldmostcommonlyin
pastgenerationsmayrevealsomeinterestingsimilarities.Tounderstandthegenerational
differencesofthepast,theperspectivesofourpredecessorsmustbeexplored.Surveillancevia
technologywasnotaverybigissuebackinthe1970s,butitstartedtobecomesomethingofa
probleminthe1980s.AccordingtoLyon,whowroteComputers,SurveillanceandPrivacy,

duringthe80schangingsocialandtechnicalconditionsanddevelopingsocialtheorywere
converging,stimulatingtheemergenceofanewsocialsciencesubfieldcenteredonsurveillance
(p.4).Technologyreallystartedtodeveloptheeaseofmonitoringthepublic,anditwouldaffect
theperspectivesofthoseenteringthe1990swithtechnologyandtheirdisposal.Atthe
beginningofthisdecade,manyNorthAmericanswereafraidofcomputers,theywereunsureof
theircapabilities.InastudyrecordedinNorthAmerica,bytheresearchcompanyEKOSinthe
early90s,fouroutoffivesurveyedNorthAmericansbelievedthatcomputersendangertheir
senseofprivacy(1993).Ibelievethattechnology,likecomputersystems,canbeextremely
vulnerabletocyberattacksanduserswithmaliciousintent,withoutpropersecurityprotocols.
Imaginehowpoortheconceptofhyperprivacywasbackthen,thesepeoplehadeveryrighttobe
afraidofthesecomputers.Inthebook
LimitsofPrivacy,
Etzionidescribestheterm
hyperprivacybystatingItisbasedonencryptiontheadvancedformswhichareverydifficult,
somebelieveimpossibletocrack(p.75).
Enforcingthelawbackinthedayisprobablyseenbymanyasverydifficultcompared
totheinnovative,advancedmethodsweusetodaytodothesamething.Governmentagencies
todayrelyheavilyonsurveillanceofasuspectstechnology,whichisbothgoodandbad.As
statedpreviously,Ibelievethatthegovernmentshouldonlythehavetherighttoheavilymonitor
suspectedterrorists.Backinthe90s,encryptionwasnowherenearassophisticatedasitis
today,soifeverthegovernmentlegallyobtainedasuspectscomputer,searchingitwasvery
easy.TheideaofhyperencryptionthatEtzionidescribedwasnotavailabletocitizensatthis
time.Criminals(andjustabouteveryoneelse)todayhaveaccesstohyperencryption,or
sophisticatedencryption,almosteffortlessly.Mostsmartphoneshavemanyencryptionfeatures,

whichmakesthejobofauthoritiesincreasinglymoredifficult.Verysimilartomyopinion,
Etzionibelievesthathyperencryption,..greatlyenhancesprivacyinthecyberworld,it[also]
posesnewandratherdifficultbarrierstopublicauthoritiesasterrorists,druglords,pedophiles
andothercriminalsincreasinglydrawonthenewformsofencryption(pg76).Theseencryption
featuresalsohaveantitamperingfeaturesthatdeterusersattemptingtobreakintodevices.These
featuresusuallyendintheharddiskwipingofadevice,destroyinganypotentialevidencesought
byinvestigators(orhackers).Etzioniforetoldthebenefitsandproblemswithhyperencryption,
technologycanmakeinvestigationsmuchmoredifficultinsomecases.
AverycommonconcernthatreallycaughtalotofattentionandscrutinywastheNSAs
PRISMprogram.ThisprogramgavetheFBIandNSAbackdooraccesstopopularcompanies
thatprovideservicesformuchoftheUnitedStates.Google,Facebook,AppleandMicrosoft
gratedaccesstothegovernmentbyallowingthemtogatheraudio,video,photographs,emails,
anddocumentsfrom[their]internalservers(Seifert,2013).Imyselfthoughtthiswasanew
issue,butinthelate1990sbackdoorswerestillatopicofdiscussion,andinsomecasesfeared.
RonRivestfromMITspokeabouthowtheFBIwouldbeableto..useamasterbackdoorkeyto
decryptthemessagekey,whichisthenusedtodecryptamessage(Rivest,1998).Althoughhe
didnotspeaktotheextremeformofabackdoor,likethePRISMprogram,thismessage
decryptorisaformofabackdoor.Technologyenthusiaststwodecadesagohadverysimilar
ideasofprivacy,andsomeofthesamefearswehavetoday.
Comparing/ContrastingwiththreeotherculturesoutsidetheU.S
PrivacyisanissueinmanycountriesotherthantheUnitedStates.Eachcountry
treatsprivacyintheirownway,whethertheyallowcertainprivaciesorthoseprivaciesdonot

10

evenexist.CountrieslikeChina,England,andFinlandalldifferinprivacy,especiallywhen
comparedtotheUnitedStates.Thewaythattheytreattheirprivacyhastodowiththeirtypeof
culture.
Chinahasverylittleprivacyintheirculture.PublicbathroomsinChinaarebuiltwithlow
partitionssothatthepeoplecantalktoeachotherwhiledoingtheirbusiness.Inthewestern
culture,thatisverydifferentbecausebathroomsaresupposedtobeveryprivate(RoughGuides
2016).TheUnitedStatescitizensareveryindependent,whichisthecompleteoppositeofChina
becausetheyvaluethecommunitymore.Thislackofprivacyintheirculturealsoattributestheir
lackofprivacyfromtheirgovernment.ArecentlawinChinathatisonthevergeofbeingpassed
willgivetheirgovernmentfullcensorshipoftheirinternetandwhatkindofinformationthat
theircitizenswillbeabletosee.Thislawwillonlyallowdomesticdomainstobeusedsoforeign
domainswillnotbeabletobeaccessed.DomesticdomainsinChinaforegomanyregulatory
lawsthatgivesthegovernmentpoweroverwhatcontentisallowed(Bodeen2015).
Tosaytheyhavenoprivacythoughwouldbewrong.Chinadidpassalawregarding
privacyandsecuritytoattractbusinessestotheircountry.Although,thelawwasverybroadon
theactionsthatneedtobetaken.Itstatesthattheywilltryandprotectsensitivedatabut
doesntspecifywhatthatdatais.Alsocompanieswillneedtoaskforconsentwhengathering
thisdata,butitdoesntspecifyhowtheyneedtoask.Soitcouldjustbehiddeninthetermsand
agreementsthatpossiblywontbereadbytheusers(Lovells2013).
Ontheotherendofthespectrum,FinlandleansmoretowardsprivacythantheUnited
States.Socially,Finnsarereservedmoretothemselvesanddonotpromptthemselvestospeakto
strangers(Alho2010).Whenitcomestopolitics,alawwaspassedaround1776calledthe

11

FreedomofInformationAct.Itwasoneofthefirstcountriestodoso.Thisactabolishespolitical
censorship,unlikeChina,andallowsthepublictorequestaccesstoanyinformationthatthe
governmenthas.Thishelpstoholdthegovernmentaccountablesothattheycanthaveany
informationthattheyshouldntbecausethepubliccouldeasilyfindout.Thislawhasinfluenced
manyothergovernmentstodothesame(Skinner2014).Asof2014,Finlandhasbeenenhancing
theirdatasystemsinhealthcareandsocialwelfaretopreventanybreachingofsecurity
(Nevalainen2014).TheFinnishpeoplevaluetheirprivacyinmostforms.
EnglandandtheUnitedStateshavesimilarcultureswithfewdifferences.Onebeingthat
theydriveontheoppositesideoftheroad.Socially,theBritishpeoplearesimilarinthewaythat
theneedenjoytheirprivacy.Etiquettessuchasstaringorbeinginsomeonespersonalspace,
whichisaboutarmslength,isviewedasveryrude(Baines2015).Differencesariseintheway
thatbothcountriesviewdigitalprivacy.
ThedifferentapproachesoftheEUandUStowards
dataprotectionprobablystemfromhistory.InEurope,wherepeoplehavehaddictatorships,data
protectionisdeclaredasahumanrightandregulatedbycomprehensivedataprotection
legislation(INFOSEC2013).Englandhassetlawstoprotectthetheircitizensinformationand
itcanonlybecollectedunderstrictconditions.OneoftheselawsistheDataProtectionDirective
1995/46/EC,whichdefinestheregulationsofhowtodetermineifapersonhasdonesomething
towarrantthecollectionoftheirpersonaldata.TheUnitedStatesrelyonmoreofthestate'slaws
fordefiningprivacywhileEnglandhasdefinedprivacyintheircountrieslawasawhole
(INFOSEC2013).
Eachcountryhastheirowndefinitionsofprivacy.Thosedefinitionsofprivacyare
definedbytheirgovernmentandsomewhatreflectonwhattypeofculturesthattheyhave.China

12

forexamplearemoreopenasaculturesotheirprivacyislacking.FinlandandEnglandwhose
cultureisleanedmoretowardsprivacy,havemorelawstoprotectthoseprivaciesinplace.The
UnitedStateshaslawstoprotectprivacybutnotasmuchastheFinlandandEngland.Someof
thoseprivaciesweregivenupinordertotryandprotectthecountryasawhole.
Withtechnologygrowingatsucharapidpace,ourprivaciesmustalsogrowatasimilar
rate.Fromtheperspectivesofthemanyregions,generations,politicalparties,privacyadvocates,
wefoundthattherewerelargeamountsofsimilaritiesanddifferenceswhenitcametoprivacy.
Withineachofthesecategories,viewpointswerediscoveredthatweourselvesbothagreedand
alsodisagreedwith.Eventsthatoccurredinthepasthelpedformtheworldweliveintoday,in
manyareas,privacyissacrificedforthesakeofsecurity.Willtheneedforsecuritytransform
ourperspectivesofprivacyfurther,orwillourexpectationsremainconsistent?

13

References
Butler,B.(2013).
4InternetPrivacylawsYouShouldKnowAbout.
NetworkWorld.

http://www.networkworld.com/article/2164315/lanwan/4internetprivacylawsyoushouldkn
owabout.html

Canada.(1993).
Privacyrevealed:TheCanadianprivacysurvey
.Ottawa:EKOSResearchAssoc.
Etzioni,A.(1999).
Thelimitsofprivacy
.NewYork:BasicBooks.
Lyon,D.(1996).
Computers,surveillance,andprivacy
.Minneapolis:Univ.ofMinnesotaPress.
Rivest,R.L.(1998).Thecaseagainstregulatingencryptiontechnology.Scientific
American,279(4),8889.
Tancer,B.(2009).
Click:Whatwedoonlineandwhyitmatters
.London:HarperCollins.
USDepartmentofState.(2016).
PrivacyAct

https://foia.state.gov/Learn/PrivacyAct.aspx

Seifert,D.(2013).SecretprogramgivesNSA,FBIbackdooraccesstoApple,Google,
Facebook,Microsoftdata.RetrievedMarch27,2016,from
http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/6/4403868/nsafbiminedataapplegooglefacebookmicrosoft
othersprism
Nevalainen,J.(2014).ProducersofdatasystemssubjecttonewregulationinFinland.Retrieved
April01,2016,from
http://www.twobirds.com/en/news/articles/2014/finland/producersofdatasystemssubjecttonewre
gulationinfinland

14

Alho,J.(2010).AGuideToFinnishCustomsandManners.RetrievedApril01,2016,from
http://finland.fi/lifesociety/aguidetofinnishcustomsandmanners/
Skinnner,D.(2014).Finland.RetrievedApril01,2016,from
https://freespeechfreepress.wordpress.com/europe/finland/
Baines,R.(2015).WhataresomeculturaldifferencesbetweenAmericansandBritishthatarenot
politicalorreligiousinnature?.RetrievedApril01,2016,from
https://www.quora.com/WhataresomeculturaldifferencesbetweenAmericansandBritishthatare
notpoliticalorreligiousinnature
INFOSEC.(2013).DifferencesbetweentheprivacylawsintheEUandtheUS.RetrievedApril01,
2016,from
http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/differencesprivacylawsineuandus/
Ybarra,M.(2015).FBIadmitsnomajorcasescrackedwithPatriotActsnoopingpowers.Retrieved
April01,2016,from
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/21/fbiadmitspatriotactsnoopingpowersdidntc
rack/?page=all
RoughGuides.(2016).China//CultureandEtiquette.RetrievedApril01,2016,from
http://www.roughguides.com/destinations/asia/china/cultureetiquette/
Lovells,H.(2013).MakingSenseofChinasNewPrivacyLaws.RetrievedApril01,2016,from
https://iapp.org/news/a/makingsenseofchinasnewprivacylaws2/