It’s a good Topic
Download 1.51 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- IoT trades privacy for efficiency, Orwellian state possible
- IoT means the END of privacy
- IoT trades surveillance and a loss of privacy for convenience
- Even those who set their devices to “private” will have data collected by goverments and big data companies
- Companies will know everything about you
- In the US, people do not have a right to control data about them
- Smart meters violate privacy
- Privacy invasive information that can be collected from smart meters
- How different devices spy on you
- IoT means systemic privacy violations
- Data collected by smart devices contains sensitive personal data
ConExtinctionIoT threatens human survivalJanna Anderson and Lee Raine, 2014, The Internet of Things Will Thrive by 2025, http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/05/14/internet-of-things/ Pew Research Center DOA: 9-28-16 Mark Lockwood, a researcher, wrote, “There are clearly major ethical considerations that need to be addressed … The Internet of Things could be a major threat to society as we know it and, possibly, to our continued existence as a species on this planet. As it stands now, our laws and policies are not advancing as quickly as technology develops. This leaves us vulnerable at the macro and micro level. One concern is the question of who will be controlling the Internet of Things. This could be an incredible, powerful tool for controlling populations. With the current blurred lines between governments and corporations, the Internet of Things could result in a global ‘cult of personality-’type government, as exists in North Korea.” A professor of telecommunications at Pennsylvania State University wrote, “What about widespread and detrimental effects? … Wearable, connected visual devices—ie, Google Glass or some contact lens version thereof—will be the gateway to integrating the real and virtual worlds, backed up by AI…This raises all kinds of safety and social issues that will need to be addressed.” A long-time scholar and activist focused on the commons said, “The unilateral introduction of smart sensors and wearable devices—usually to advance some company’s business strategy, not necessarily to advance a collective good—will provoke social disruptions and disorientation, and perhaps, backlashes … Conventional policy structures are ill equipped to deal with this trend, and disaggregated individuals are similarly powerless. While there are indeed useful purposes that could be served by these various technologies and the Internet of Things, most are being proposed in gee-whiz, socially naive ways and without serious concern for the long-term social implications or for social consent. Where is the US Office of Technology Assessment when we really need it? Who can host a more intelligent, or even dissenting, dialogue on this issue? Should these technologies be presumptively deployed just because they offer some focused, new benefit, and some company can make money from them?” A developer of technological systems that assist the development of the whole human wrote, “Will there be AI systems that question our understanding of ideas?” Privacy LinksIoT trades privacy for efficiency, Orwellian state possibleGeoff Webb is Director of Solution Strategy at NetIQ, February 2015, Wired, Say Goodbye To Privacy, https://www.wired.com/insights/2015/02/say-goodbye-to-privacy/ DOA: 9-26-15 YOU’RE PROBABLY ABOUT to lose something precious. Something you can’t see. Something you can’t touch, taste, or smell and probably don’t think about regularly. And yet when it’s gone, which I believe it will be soon, you may spend the rest of your life longing for it. What you’re about to lose is your privacy. Actually, it’s worse than that. You aren’t just going to lose your privacy, you’re going to have to watch the very concept of privacy be rewritten under your nose. That’s because while the Internet of Things (IoT) is going to add a lot to our lives, it’s probably going to take our privacy in payment, whether you want it to or not. We shouldn’t be surprised that the IoT will change things, nor that the full impact is difficult to predict. Big changes brought on by technology are something we’ve seen plenty of times before. When the steam engine was first introduced in the 1800’s, no one could have foreseen the impact it would have on the way we think about everything from transportation, city design, even need for a standard “time” across the country. [ Also on Insights: Tackling Privacy Concerns Is Key to Expanding the Internet of Things ] Other changes have followed, driven by new technology – the internal combustion engine, flight, the integrated circuit, the Internet. All of these technological changes forced us to redefine how we think about our lives, what technology means to us. Over the years, these changes have created, and killed, entire industries. At each step, the impact of our technology arrived faster, and was more deeply felt. Yet the Internet of Things won’t just change some particular aspects of our lives; it won’t affect say commerce, or industry, or politics. It will affect, shape, even redefine them all. At once. And, if the past is anything to go by, the changes will happen even more quickly than ever before. Why? What makes the IoT so unique in the long history of technological change? 1. It is the aggregation of a large number of already disruptive technologies, and it combines the disruptive elements of those technologies in new ways, magnifying their effects. Smart tech, the Internet, social identity, big data, cloud, mobility, all these are affected by, and contribute to, the emerging IoT. It’s like putting gun powder, dynamite, nitroglycerine, and a bunch of road flares into a box and shaking them up. Something’s going to happen, and happen fast. 2. The IoT is pervasive in a way that nothing else has been, except possibly pottery and agriculture, and those two technologies *defined* human existence. The IoT will be *everywhere* which means that when the changes occur (and they will) those changes will impact everything, and everyone – there’s no ‘offline’ no ‘standby’ for the IoT. No one will be able to escape its impact, because you won’t *use* the IoT, you’ll live inside it – all day, every day. 3. As a society we’re addicted to tech in a way that no generation ever has been before and we already have the mindset – the Pavlovian response – to readily embrace this next generation of technology that IoT represents in an unquestioning manner. We rely on it for everything and we’ve been trained to expect technology to answer our every need, because no matter what the question – there’s an app for that. Yet, the most profound effect of all the ways in which the IoT changes our lives is that it will blur, to the point of invisibility, the concept of privacy. When we live in a world in which there are countless sensors and smart objects around us, all the time; when the clothes we wear, even things inside our bodies, are smart and connected, then the concept of “private” becomes far more ephemeral. What’s private? From whom? When? As more and more information is gathered about us, constantly, so the concept of being offline, of being unavailable, or simply being alone, will recede. And as it goes, so will our control over the information gathered about us. Big data, especially, is going to make it hard to keep anything private – as more and more things gather increasing contextual information about our behavior, so the capability to analyze and predict, to seek out the identity of the people behind every action, will open very public windows into all our lives. We may well be living in the last era of privacy – and standing on the brink of a post-privacy society. It’s not easy to imagine what that will be like. Perhaps in the end it will force us to face the deeper truths about human nature, that we are all much the same. Perhaps it will be an Orwellian nightmare in which governments spy on us constantly. Most probably, it will be a little of both. The good news, however, is that we almost certainly won’t have to wait long to find out. IoT means the END of privacyAndre Back, June 18, 2012, An Open Internet of Things, http://www.rs-online.com/designspark/electronics/blog/an-open-internet-of-things DOA: 9-26-15 The Internet of Things (IoT) is set to herald an age in which physical objects create and consume data without human intervention, and this will have an enormous impact on our everyday lives. In recognising this and in a bid to establish the foundations of a privacy-sensitive Open Internet of Things, an assembly of practitioners gathered together in London over the weekend of 16/17th June 2012 to draft a definition of what one might look like. Both days of the Open IoT Assembly started off with a series of presentations that provided context, framing and inspiration. A great deal of information was conveyed and some complex, and at times profound, issues were covered. What follows is an attempt at capturing just a few of the key messages from each presentation — there are omissions and there may well be errors. Channelling Lawrence Lessig, Adam suggested that increasingly code is law, and yet software code can be updated without constitutional change. An example was given in the form of a civic CCTV system which may be installed for simple monitoring purposes, and then later upgraded in order that it can be used to track people through facial recognition. And we were urged to think about the implications of when there is power, e.g. legal or political, in a technology system. In drawing his presentation to a close Adam ended on a positive note and outlined a vision for the IoT — this mode of ubiquitous computing — in which it serves to reduce the isolation brought about by sitting in front of a computer. Rob took us on a breakneck speed tour of his expansive vision for the IoT, where efficiencies would be removed from systems, corruption would be laid bare and… there would be an end to privacy! He noted that data ecologies were already developing and the question now was whether these are open or closed, and proposed that there should be a public open data backbone. He told in brief how he has been working with the Dutch government to explore how individuals empowered by the IoT could compete with mission critical public services, and noted that China is run by engineers and therefore posesses an “IoT mindset”. In closing Rob issued a call to “occupy the [IoT] gateways!” with open source software and hardware. [Adam Greenfield, Founder and Managing Director, Urbanscale] [Rob van Kranenburg, European Comission IoT Expert Group]
Privacy lossJanna Anderson and Lee Raine, 2014, The Internet of Things Will Thrive by 2025, http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/05/14/internet-of-things/ Pew Research Center DOA: 9-28-16 Andrew Chen, associate professor of computer science at Minnesota State University Moorhead (MN), responded, “The danger will be in loss of privacy and the reduction of people into numbers: the dark side of the quantified self…. ‘Subliminal advertising’ will take on a whole new meaning when it can invade your thoughts through what you wear. This is the real danger, one that suggests technologies like these be avoided until a good framework can be developed to compensate for these sorts of dangers.” Anita Salem, a design research consultant, wrote, “The biggest effect will be government-sanctioned spyware in every aspect of our lives.” Even those who set their devices to “private” will have data collected by goverments and big data companiesJanna Anderson and Lee Raine, 2014, The Internet of Things Will Thrive by 2025, http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/05/14/internet-of-things/ Pew Research Center DOA: 9-28-16 William Schrader, co-founder and CEO of PSINet, the first commercial ISP, said, “For the hundreds of millions of individuals willing to share their interests, locations, and network of friends with everyone watching, including governments and Big Data, the wearable and scannable devices will be easily adopted. For those less willing to share, they will not be used except in the ‘private setting,’ if one exists. And, everyone will know that even information collected under ‘private’ settings will be delivered to governments and Big Data… Some devices, such as a galvanic skin response (GSR) monitor, intended to aid the wearer in telling him when he is nervous, can also be remotely monitored by Big Data (read: governments) in real time to detect lying. Intrusion by anyone wishing to harm another person will be much easier when self-monitoring devices are worn routinely, which are also broadcast to the wearer’s smart phone, which can be remotely monitored by others in real-time. In short, if people fear nothing and trust everyone, they will wear these devices easily. For those who are vigilant in protecting their privacy, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to sell a device to them… The pros and cons of advanced devices arealways intrusive. The proof will be when the military requires them to be worn at all times by soldiers; that alone will be convincing that they tell more than the wearer wants to be telling.” Companies will know everything about youCrump & Harwood,, 2014, Tomgram: Crump and Harwood, The Net Closes Around Us, http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175822/tomgram%3A_crump_and_harwood%2C_the_net_closes_around_us/ [Catherine Crump is a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. She is a non-residential fellow with the Stanford Center for Internet and Society and an adjunct professor of clinical law at NYU. Her principal focus is representing individuals challenging the lawfulness of government surveillance programs. Follow her on Twitter at @CatherineNCrump.Matthew Harwood is senior writer/editor with the ACLU. A TomDispatch regular, his work has been published by Al-Jazeera America, the American Conservative, the Columbia Journalism Review, the Guardian, Guernica, Reason, Salon, Truthout, and the Washington Monthly. He also regularly reviews books for the Future of Freedom Foundation. Follow him on Twitter at @mharwood31., DOA: 9-26-15 Estimates vary, but by 2020 there could be over 30 billion devices connected to the Internet. Once dumb, they will have smartened up thanks to sensors and other technologies embedded in them and, thanks to your machines, your life will quite literally have gone online. The implications are revolutionary. Your smart refrigerator will keep an inventory of food items, noting when they go bad. Your smart thermostat will learn your habits and adjust the temperature to your liking. Smart lights will illuminate dangerous parking garages, even as they keep an “eye” out for suspicious activity. Techno-evangelists have a nice catchphrase for this future utopia of machines and the never-ending stream of information, known as Big Data, it produces: the Internet of Things. So abstract. So inoffensive. Ultimately, so meaningless. A future Internet of Things does have the potential to offer real benefits, but the dark side of that seemingly shiny coin is this: companies will increasingly know all there is to know about you. Most people are already aware that virtually everything a typical person does on the Internet is tracked. In the not-too-distant future, however, real space will be increasingly like cyberspace, thanks to our headlong rush toward that Internet of Things. With the rise of the networked device, what people do in their homes, in their cars, in stores, and within their communities will be monitored and analyzed in ever more intrusive ways by corporations and, by extension, the government. And one more thing: in cyberspace it is at least theoretically possible to log off. In your own well-wired home, there will be no “opt out.” You can almost hear the ominous narrator’s voice from an old “Twilight Zone” episode saying, “Soon the net will close around all of us. There will be no escape.” Except it’s no longer science fiction. It’s our barely distant present. "[W]e estimate that only one percent of things that could have an IP address do have an IP address today, so we like to say that ninety-nine percent of the world is still asleep," Padmasree Warrior, Cisco's Chief Technology and Strategy Officer, told the Silicon Valley Summit in December. "It’s up to our imaginations to figure out what will happen when the ninety-nine percent wakes up." Yes, imagine it. Welcome to a world where everything you do is collected, stored, analyzed, and, more often than not, packaged and sold to strangers -- including government agencies. In January, Google announced its $3.2 billion purchase of Nest, a company that manufactures intelligent smoke detectors and thermostats. The signal couldn’t be clearer. Google believes Nest’s vision of the “conscious home” will prove profitable indeed. And there’s no denying how cool the technology is. Nest’s smoke detector, for instance, can differentiate between burnt toast and true danger. In the wee hours, it will conveniently shine its nightlight as you groggily shuffle to the toilet. It speaks rather than beeps. If there’s a problem, it can contact the fire department. The fact that these technologies are so cool and potentially useful shouldn’t, however, blind us to their invasiveness as they operate 24/7, silently gathering data on everything we do. Will companies even tell consumers what information they’re gathering? Will consumers have the ability to determine what they’re comfortable with? Will companies sell or share data gathered from your home to third parties? And how will companies protect that data from hackers and other miscreants? The dangers aren’t theoretical. In November, the British tech blogger Doctorbeet discovered that his new LG Smart TV was snooping on him. Every time he changed the channel, his activity was logged and transmitted unencrypted to LG. Doctorbeet checked the TV’s option screen and found that the setting “collection of watching info” was turned on by default. Being a techie, he turned it off, but it didn’t matter. The information continued to flow to the company anyway. As more and more household devices -- your television, your thermostat, your refrigerator -- connect to the Internet, device manufacturers will undoubtedly follow a model of comprehensive data collection and possibly infinite storage. (And don’t count on them offering you an opt-out either.) They have seen the giants of the online world -- the Googles, the Facebooks -- make money off their users’ personal data and they want a cut of the spoils. Your home will know your secrets, and chances are it will have loose lips. The result: more and more of what happens behind closed doors will be open to scrutiny by parties you would never invite into your home. After all, the Drug Enforcement Administration already subpoenas utility company records to determine if electricity consumption in specific homes is consistent with a marijuana-growing operation. What will come next? Will eating habits collected by smart fridges be repackaged and sold to healthcare or insurance companies as predictors of obesity or other health problems -- and so a reasonable basis for determining premiums? Will smart lights inform drug companies of insomniac owners? Keep in mind that when such data flows are being scrutinized, you’ll no longer be able to pull down the shades, not when the Peeping Toms of the twenty-first century come packaged in glossy, alluring boxes. Many people will just be doing what Americans have always done -- upgrading their appliances. It may not initially dawn on them that they are also installing surveillance equipment targeted at them. And companies have obvious incentives to obscure this fact as much as possible. As the “conscious home” becomes a reality, we will all have to make a crucial and conscious decision for ourselves: Will I let this device into my home? Renters may not have that option. And eventually there may only be internet-enabled appliances. In the US, people do not have a right to control data about themCrump & Harwood,, 2014, Tomgram: Crump and Harwood, The Net Closes Around Us, http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175822/tomgram%3A_crump_and_harwood%2C_the_net_closes_around_us/ [Catherine Crump is a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. She is a non-residential fellow with the Stanford Center for Internet and Society and an adjunct professor of clinical law at NYU. Her principal focus is representing individuals challenging the lawfulness of government surveillance programs. Follow her on Twitter at @CatherineNCrump.Matthew Harwood is senior writer/editor with the ACLU. A TomDispatch regular, his work has been published by Al-Jazeera America, the American Conservative, the Columbia Journalism Review, the Guardian, Guernica, Reason, Salon, Truthout, and the Washington Monthly. He also regularly reviews books for the Future of Freedom Foundation. Follow him on Twitter at @mharwood31., DOA: 9-26-15 Congress’s watchdog, the Government Accountability Office, reviewed U.S. privacy law and found that citizens generally do not have the right to control the scope of information collected about them or limit its use, even when it pertains to their health or their finances. And if the information is incorrect -- something you might never find out -- there’s no U.S. law that requires data aggregators to correct it. Paul Ohm, a policy advisor to the Federal Trade Commission, calls these immense troves of personal information “databases of ruin.” He worries that, over time, these databases will include new waves of data -- maybe from your conscious home or location information from commercial sensors -- and so become ever more consolidated. Soon, he fears, “these databases will grow to connect every individual to at least one closely guarded secret. This might be a secret about a medical condition, family history, or personal preference. It is a secret that, if revealed, would cause more than embarrassment or shame; it would lead to serious, concrete, devastating harm.” Sooner or later, with smart devices seamlessly using sensors and Big Data provided by data aggregators, it will be possible to pick you out of a crowd and identify you in complex ways in real time. If intelligent surveillance cameras armed with facial recognition technology have access to social media profiles as well as the information stored by data aggregators, a digital dossier of your life could be called up on-demand whenever your face is recognized. Imagine the power retailers and companies will exert over your life if they not only know who you are and where you are, but what your weaknesses are -- whether that’s booze, cigarettes, or the appealing mortgage rate with the sketchy small print. Are we looking at a future where the car salesman really does know what he has to do to put us in that car? Big Data is creating the possibility of a far more entrenched, class-based surveillance society that discriminates using our perceived successes and preys on our weaknesses. Smart meters violate privacyIan Brown, University of Oxford, 2013, Britain’s Smart Meter Program: A Case Study in Privacy by Design, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2215646 DOA: 9-26-15 In 2009, the Electricity Directive2 and Natural Gas Directive3 added a requirement that 80% of consumers have smart meters by 2020, subject to a positive cost-benefit analysis for markets and consumers. Because smart meters can collect and share detailed information about energy use and hence household life, their impact on privacy has become a high-profile matter of interest to energy and privacy regulators, and to privacy campaigners, journalists, and members of the public. In one significant case, the First Chamber of the Dutch parliament rejected two smart metering bills in 2009 because of privacy concerns, forcing the government to add significant privacy protections to revised bills that were passed in 2011. Privacy invasive information that can be collected from smart metersIan Brown, University of Oxford, 2013, Britain’s Smart Meter Program: A Case Study in Privacy by Design, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2215646 DOA: 9-26-15 When are you usually away from home? Is your household protected with an electronic alarm system? If so, how often do you arm it? How often do you arrive home around the time thebars close? How often do you get a full night’s sleep v. drive sleep deprived? How often are you late to work, or rushing to get there on time? Does the time it takes you to get from your home to your workplace require that you break the speed limit to get there? On what days and during what times do you watch TV? How much home time do you spend in front of your computer? How often do you eat in? Do you tend to eat hot or cold breakfasts? What’s the relative frequency of microwave dinners to three-pot feasts? How often do you entertain? Are any of your appliances failing or operating below optimal efficiency? Do you own lots of gadgets? Are you a Laundromat person, or do you have your own washer and drier? Are you a restless sleeper, getting up frequently throughout the night? In a custody battle: Have you ever left your child home alone? How often, and for how long? In a worker’s compensation hearing: How is it, with your disabled back, you were able to turn on the TV in the upstairs of your home less than a minute after turning off the lights downstairs? Alabama recently passed a tax provision requiring obese state employees to pay for their health insurance unless they actively work to reduce their body mass index. So: why haven’t you used your treadmill at home any time in the last week? You clearly have not been out of the house and away from a computer or TV long enough for aerobic exercise. Do clinically depressed or bipolar individuals have distinctive energy profiles? What about people with behavioural disorders? Could you tell if someone hadn’t been taking his or her medication? How different devices spy on youJoseph Steinberg, January 27, 2014, Forbes, These Devices May be Spying on You (Even in Your Own Home), http://www.forbes.com/sites/josephsteinberg/2014/01/27/these-devices-may-be-spying-on-you-even-in-your-own-home/#7acbd2256376 Think you are safe in your own home? These innocent-looking devices may be spying on you, or performing other nefarious actions: Your Television Televisions may track what you watch. Some LG televisions were found to spy on not only what channels were being watched, but even transmitted back to LG the names of files on USB drives connected to the television. Hackers have also demonstrated that they can hack some models of Samsung TVs and use them as vehicles to capture data from networks to which they are attached, and even watch whatever the cameras built in to the televisions see. Your Kitchen Appliances Many recent-generation kitchen appliances come equipped with connectivity that allows for great convenience, but this benefit comes at a price – potential spying and security risks. Information about when you wake up in the morning (as extrapolated from data on your Internet-connected coffee maker) and your shopping habits (as determined by information garnered from your smart fridge) can help robbers target your home. Furthermore, potential vulnerabilities have been reported in smart kitchen devices for quite some time, and less than a month ago a smart refrigerator was found to have been used by hackers in a malicious email attack. You read that correctly – hackers successfully used a refrigerator to send out malicious emails. Your DVR/Cable-Box/Satellite-TV Receiver Providers of television programming can easily track what you are watching or recording, and can leverage that information to target advertisements more efficiently. Depending on service agreements, providers could potentially even sell this type of information to others, and, of course, they are likely to furnish this information to the government if so instructed. Your Modem (and Internet Service Provider) If it wanted to, or was asked by the government to do so, your ISP could easily compile a list of Internet sites with which you have communicated. Even if the providers themselves declined to spy as such, it may be possible for some of their technical employees to do so. Worse yet, since people often subscribe to Internet service from the same providers as they do television service, a single party may know a lot more about you then you might think. Your Smartphone Not only may your cellular provider be tracking information about you – such as with whom you communicate and your location – but it, as well asGoogle GOOG -1.44% (in the case of Android), Apple AAPL -1.14% (in the case of iPhones), or other providers of software on the device, may be aware of far more detailed actions such as what apps you install and run, when you run them, etc. Some apps sync your contacts list to the providers’ servers by default, and others have been found to ignore privacy settings. Phones may even be capturing pictures or video of you when you do not realize and sending the photos or video to criminals! Your Webcam or Home Security Cameras On that note, malware installed on your computer may take control of the machine’s webcam and record you – by taking photos or video – when you think the camera is off. Miss Teen USA was allegedly blackmailed by a hacker who took control of her laptop’s webcam and photographed her naked when she thought the camera was not on. Likewise, malware on computers or hackers operating on those machines could potentially intercept transmissions from security cameras attached to the same network as the devices (some cameras transmit data unencrypted), and copy such videos for their own systems. Such information is invaluable to burglars. Your Telephone It is common knowledge that the NSA has been tracking people’s calls, and even the changes proposed by President Obama won’t truly eliminate the spying. Of course, phone companies also track phone calls as they need call information for their billing systems. So, even if you use an old, analog phone your calls may be tracked. If you are receiving phone service from the same provider as you get your Internet and/or television service, phone records are yet another element of information that a single party knows about you. Your Lights, Home Entertainment System, and Home Alarm System Various newer lighting, home entertainment, and home security systems can be controlled via Wi-Fi or even across the Internet. Remote control is a great convenience, but it also raises questions as to whether information is reported to outside parties. Does your alarm provider get notified every time you come and go? Is information about your choice of audio entertainment relayed to manufacturers of the equipment on which it is played or the supplier of the music? Could hackers gather information from smart lighting, entertainment, or security devices – or the networks on which they communicate – to determine patterns of when you are home, when you are likely to have company over, and when your house is empty? Your Thermostat (Heat and/or Air Conditioning) Various Internet-connected thermostats are now available. They provide great convenience, but might they also be transmitting information about your preferences to others? Google’s acquisition of Nest has raised interest in this issue – but Nest is not the only provider of such technology. There are even products distributed by utilities that raise concerns. In my area, for example, the utility company offers a discount to people who install a thermostat that allows the utility to remotely cycle air conditioning on and off in case of excessive power demand. Might that thermostat – or future generations of it – also report information to the utility company? Your Laundry Equipment Like kitchen appliances, washers and dryers that connect to the Internet may report information that users may not realize is being shared, and that if intercepted, or misused, could help criminals identify when you are home and when you are not. Your Medical Devices It is not news that pacemakers, insulin pumps, and other medical devices can be hacked. But even normal functioning devices may spy on you. Various pacemakers relay patient status information over the Internet – this may be valuable in some cases, but also creates risks. Could unauthorized parties obtain information from such data in transmit? What if a criminal sent out phony “pacemaker impersonating” messages stating that a patient is in distress in order to have his physician instruct him to go to the hospital – and leave his home vulnerable? Your iPod or Other Entertainment Devices Yes, there are still millions of people using specialized non-phone-equipped electronic devices, but these devices are often Wi-Fi enabled and pose similar to risks to smartphones as discussed above. Of course if you are reading books or magazines, watching videos, or listening to audio supplied by an online provider, your choices and preferences are likely being tracked. Coming Soon… Your Handgun Millions of Americans keep guns in their homes, so privacy issues surrounding firearms are an issue regardless of one’s position in the perpetual American debate about gun control. In the near future so-called “smartguns” – firearms that contain computers with various safety capabilities intended to prevent accidents and curtail unauthorized use – are expected to enter the market. But, will the embedded computers also spy on the firearms’ owners? Do the guns contain circuitry that might allow law enforcement to track – or even to disable – the weapons? It is hard to imagine that governments would not be interested in adding such “features” to weapons; the US government is alleged to have installed malware onto thousands of networks and placed spy chips into computers, and known to have lost track of weapons it intended to monitor. Would the government really treat firearms as being less worthy of spied upon than telephones? Vendors may attempt to address some of the aforementioned concerns, but many of the issues are sure to remain for quite some time. So, if you want to take advantage of the benefits of connectivity and smart devices, keep in mind the privacy risks and act accordingly.
Concerns about privacy have led many to consider the possibility that Big Data infrastructures such as the IoT and Data Mining are inherently incompatible with privacy.[149] Writer Adam Greenfield claims that these technologies are not only an invasion of public space but are also being used to perpetuate normative behavior, citing an instance of billboards with hidden cameras that tracked the demographics of passersby who stopped to read the advertisement.[150] The Council of the Internet of Things compared the increased prevalence of digital surveillance due to the Internet of Things to the conceptual panopticon described by Jeremy Bentham in the 18th Century.[151] The assertion was defended by the works of French philosophers Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze. Foucault wrote in his novel Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison that the panopticon was a central element of the discipline society developed during the Industrial Era.[152] Foucault also argued that the discipline systems established in factories and school reflected Bentham's vision of panopticism.[152] In his 1992 paper "Postscripts on the Societies of Control," Delueze wrote that the discipline society had transitioned into a control society, with the computer replacing the panopticon as an instrument of discipline and control while still maintaining the qualities similar to that of panopticism.[153] A research team of the National Science Foundation and University of Arkansas at Little Rock discovered that the privacy of households using smart home devices could be compromised by analyzing network traffic.[154][155] Peter-Paul Verbeek, a professor of philosophy of technology at the University of Twente, Netherlands, writes that technology already influences our moral decision making, which in turn affects human agency, privacy and autonomy. He cautions against viewing technology merely as a human tool and advocates instead to consider it as an active agent.[156] Justin Brookman, of the Center for Democracy and Technology, expressed concern regarding the impact of IoT on consumer privacy, saying that "There are some people in the commercial space who say, 'Oh, big data — well, let's collect everything, keep it around forever, we'll pay for somebody to think about security later.' The question is whether we want to have some sort of policy framework in place to limit that."[157] Tim O'Reilly believes that the way companies sell the IoT devices on consumers are misplaced, disputing the notion that the IoT is about gaining efficiency from putting all kinds of devices online and postulating that "IoT is really about human augmentation. The applications are profoundly different when you have sensors and data driving the decision-making."[158] Editorials at WIRED have also expressed concern, one stating "What you're about to lose is your privacy. Actually, it's worse than that. You aren't just going to lose your privacy, you're going to have to watch the very concept of privacy be rewritten under your nose."[159] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) expressed concern regarding the ability of IoT to erode people's control over their own lives. The ACLU wrote that "There's simply no way to forecast how these immense powers – disproportionately accumulating in the hands of corporations seeking financial advantage and governments craving ever more control – will be used. Chances are Big Data and the Internet of Things will make it harder for us to control our own lives, as we grow increasingly transparent to powerful corporations and government institutions that are becoming more opaque to us."[160] Researchers have identified privacy challenges faced by all stakeholders in IoT domain, from the manufacturers and app developers to the consumers themselves, and examined the responsibility of each party in order to ensure user privacy at all times. Problems highlighted by the report[161] include:
In response to rising concerns about privacy and smart technology, in 2007 the British Government stated it would follow formal Privacy by Design principles when implementing their smart metering program. The program would lead to replacement of traditional power meters with smart power meters, which could track and manage energy usage more accurately.[162] However the British Computer Society is doubtful these principles were ever actually implemented.[163] In 2009 the Dutch Parliament rejected a similar smart metering program, basing their decision on privacy concerns. The Dutch program later revised and passed in 2011.[163] Data collected by smart devices contains sensitive personal dataPerera, et al, 2014, Privacy of Big Data in the Internet of Things Era, Charith Perera (Australian National University), Rajiv Ranjan (CSIRO Digital Productivity Flagship), Lizhe Wang (Chinese Academy of Sciences), Samee U. Khan (North Dakota State University), and Albert Y. Zomaya (University of Sydney) The collection and analysis of data in the IoT applications has many objectives. For example in case of customer sentiment analysis, such data can be used for improving personalized recommendations hence leading to better customer experiences. On other hand in case of smart cities, governments and city councils can use the knowledge extracted to make strategic decisions (e.g., placement of traffic lights, construction of new roads/bridges, etc.) and future city plans [5], [6]. However, the data collected by smart IoT devices may contain very sensitive personal data based on type of application and data sources. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 1.51 Mb. Share with your friends:
|