![]() ![]() Indeed, medical, credit, and marketing databases appear to be as troublesome as governmental databases. The Privacy Act of 1974 and data protection legislation in other countries has to some extent defused criticism and concern about potential government invasion of privacy. PRIVACY THREATS FROM TODAY'S COMPUTER SYSTEMS Then the technology can enforce that balance. ![]() An appropriate balance must be struck by the community. Anonymous leafleting and other modes of expression are properly strongly protected by the U. On the other hand, usability and privacy would suffer-imagine having to authenticate yourself to a pay phone or to a rental car!Īccountability should not always be required. It would be as if cars would only start when driven by "authorized" drivers mere keys would not work. If computer systems or applications require "proof" of identity before allowing use, we will have a much more accountable society. It is fairly easy today for a technically sophisticated person to remain anonymous and avoid accountability on the Internet for actions which are questionable or illegal, e.g., sending advertising mail to numerous newsgroups ( spamming), running a pornography server, or hacking the Web page of another person.īut technology can promote accountability as well as anonymity. Moving beyond the Web to the Internet in general, one can send anonymous messages using an anonymous remailer program. Browsing the Web has also, to date, usually been an anonymous activity. Individuals sometimes choose to remain anonymous to safeguard their privacy, for example, when browsing in a department store or purchasing an "adult" magazine. It recognizes the possibility of "privacy royalties" and describes a few of the technological mechanisms available to implement these controls. This paper first describes how accountability and anonymity can be balanced to allow user control as much as possible, community norms when the user desires conflict, and (finally) government regulation when the norms of the communities differ. Less law and more user choice is possible now technology can provide every user with controls fine-tuned for the balance of privacy and accessibilty that they prefer. There does not necessarily have to be only one privacy regime. If there are subgroups in society, or countries, with differing ideas about the answers to these questions, technology can, to a large extent, accomodate each group. Specifically, we must decide when to allow anonymous transactions and when to require accountability. We have to decide when and under what conditions to give out personal information. In order to implement "privacy" in a computer system, we need a more precise definition. In recent years, these claims have expanded to include the right to keep one's trail of sites visited on the World Wide Web confidential. Individuals claim a right of privacy for an enormously wide range of issues from the right to practice contraception or have an abortion to the right to keep bank records confidential". In addition to the generally accepted definition of privacy as "the right to be left alone," privacy has become a "broad, all-encompassing concept that envelops a whole host of human concerns about various forms of intrusive behavior, including wiretapping, surreptitious physical surveillance, and mail interception. eTrust: A Description of the eTrust ModelĬomputer Technology to Balance Accountability and Anonymity in Self-regulatory Privacy Regimes (1)Ĭyberspace Policy Institute, School of Engineering and Applied Science Labeling Practices for Privacy Protectionĭ. The Role of Technology in Self-regulatory Privacy RegimesĬ. Computer Technology to Balance Accountability and Anonymity in Self-regulatory Privacy Regimesī. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |