In many countries, surveillance of citizens is a common practice. In the US, however, recent news has sparked debate about just how willing Americans are to tolerate these practices. By some reports, IT and security professionals are much more concerned about this news than the average American.
Recently, Edward Snowden, IT administrator at Booz Allen Hamilton, a contractor for the National Security Administration (NSA), made public details of the NSA’s blanket surveillance programs, including the organization’s practice of secretly obtaining court orders to track telephone calls and emails of American citizens in hopes of uncovering terrorist activities. So, the debate began.
In the wake of this news, The Washington Post polled the public about whether they are “comfortable with the government’s practice of surveillance programs.” More than half, 56 percent, said that the tracking of telephone calls of millions of Americans was “acceptable.” Meanwhile, 45 percent felt that wholesale monitoring of email and online activities should be allowed.
“These people don’t exactly understand IT well enough to truly appreciate the long-term liabilities that something like this creates,” Stu Sjouwerman, founder of KnowBe4 a security awareness training firm, tells IFSEC Global.
The company decided to pose these same queries to a more informed group of individuals: information technology professionals. The poll, which yielded an astonishing 1,439 responses over two days, differed dramatically from the Washington Post poll. Seven out of ten IT pros deemed these monitoring practices unacceptable. In fact, 63.7 percent said the government should not be able to intrude on personal privacy, and 77.4 percent said the government should not be allowed to monitor the public’s email and online activities.
“IT people are better able to estimate the actual ramifications of creating databases that can essentially monitor everything that happens,” says Sjouwerman. “The biggest problem is not so much what happens today or tomorrow, but rather when you have a few years of data and some unsuspecting citizen gets investigated for criminal or, God forbid, political reasons.”
As the NSA collects this broad data, which could include phone records, email, GPS coordinates from mobile phones, credit card information, and more, the danger is twofold. First, the NSA might share that wealth of information with other agencies and organizations. Second, and perhaps more concerning, cybercriminals might target NSA data stores as an excellent target for a cyberattack. “Government in general, and the US government specifically, does not have a good track record in keeping data safe,” Sjouwerman notes.
IT professionals’ strong anti-surveillance sentiment stems largely from arguments about the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” Dozens quoted founding father Benjamin Frankin, who said “Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Further, IT people are concerned about the potential loss of privacy and lack of security. To illustrate, Sjouwerman offered a “word cloud” representation of the written comments:
Sjouwerman advises IT professionals to ask several questions when weighing the idea of this type of monitor program:
It got me to wondering whether this keen objection to monitoring of personal information by government is a more or less heated issue in the United States than in other parts of the world. Let us know in comments how you would have voted. What are the critical concerns you have on either side of the issue?
Enjoy the latest fire and security news, updates and expert opinions sent straight to your inbox with IFSEC Insider's essential weekly newsletters. Subscribe today to make sure you're never left behind by the fast-evolving industry landscape.
Sign up now!
Ok as an American I can tell you my opinion of the NSA’s blanket programs and that is if they want to listen to my mother get after me on the phone for 30 minutes about how I dont come to visit enough then more power to them, in fact I really do hope some poor guy has to sit there and listen to that entire conversation because I do. Now as a information technology professional I question the need, sure there is the whole prevent terrorism thing and I risk being smeared as being unpatriotic because I question my… Read more »
I understand why this would be a huge issue to many Americans. Privacy is a big deal. Everyone has a right to their privacy, especially if they are living and leading innocent lives. But if it’s for the interest of national security, then I don’t think people should be so much up in arms over it. It’s also for their safety and wellbeing.
ITs_Hazel, I don’t think there are too many people who are going to see it as a black and white issue like that. At what point does monitoring and intercepting go passed National Security and start following one groups agenda? In our country we have had the IRS target political groups and thats just over taxes, but they specifically focused on them to find things wrong. A program with too strict a focus can miss whats going on around it but a program with to broad a focus could miss what is right in front of them. I don’t mind… Read more »
My concern is that it is a bit of a slipperly slope. Today, it’s listening to conversations with my mother and perusing my spam. Later it may be draining all the data off my hard drive to sift through it. I think it bears watching.
@ JonathonL
As an American also, I agree with you 100%.
They say they are only looking at “metadata” and its nothing to worry about, no different than the post office looking at the information on an envelope we mail….but in reality it is so much more!
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/20/194505/government-could-use-metadata.html#.Uc8LgPmHuSp
Good point, Hailey. It starts with this, then eventually it goes on and on to something worse. It is scary to think about all this stuff.
I don’t mind the serveillance and monitoring as long as those doing the watching are watched themselves.
Good point, and I especially agree with the last line of your comment. There’s a huge lack of transparency here, which is why so many people are outraged at what they’re doing.
It sounds like they’re just downplaying the information they’re getting, and this explanation is something that a lot of people will accept and then they’ll move along. Others, clearly like you Stacey, look harder and dig deeper and eventually figure out that not everything is at it seems.
@ITHazel, the problem that i have is that a bunch of harmless bits of information, when brought together in a standardized and organized way, can result in huge privacy breaches. This is a slipppery slope.
@ITHazel, the problem that i have is that a bunch of harmless bits of information, when brought together in a standardized and organized way, can result in huge privacy breaches. This is a slipppery slope.
@Hazel Chua
It does seem that the metadata explanation has pacified the general public; it’s not such big news in the media anymore.
@ Hailey
It is a slippery slope. And they sure have slowed down the discussion about it recently. It is still in the news, but not the big headlines anymore. I think everyone is so worried about what Snowden is doing, they forgot what the NSA was doing.
could not agree more coin of two sides… but in reality we are at war… and in the time of war normal rules do not apply…
@ batye
When it comes to the government, do “normal” rules ever apply? 😉
interesting question:)