Privacy, does it even exists anymore?

[Dean Winchester]

As Popular Mechanics reported earlier in the week reports have surfaced that police in Michigan are using an electronic device, the Cellebrite UFED, that can pull data off a variety of cellphones and smartphones, including Android devices, iPhones and iPads. According to Cellebrite’s website, its UFED can obtain email, Web bookmarks, Web history, SIM data, cookies, instant messages, Bluetooth devices, GPS fixes, call logs, contacts and much more from your phone.

That police are using such a device might be troubling in itself, though it’s easy to imagine legitimate law-enforcement uses for that kind of data. But what’s more troubling is that they may not be using it in the course of major investigations into drugs or terrorism where that might make sense. Instead, the letter by the American Civil Liberties Union that sparked this controversy alleges that Michigan police are using it to snoop through smartphones at random traffic stops. The Michigan State Police are now denying such use, and say they only use the devices with a warrant, or with a person’s consent. (Why would you consent? Beats me.)

Regardless of what’s actually going on in Michigan, these reports have led many people to wonder: Can that kind of random cellphone search possibly be legal?

Probably not. Traditionally, a police officer may search a person when he makes an arrest. But a traffic stop isn’t an arrest. A police officer who pulls you over for an illegal lane change can arrest you if he sees contraband—a bag of marijuana, say—in plain view, but he cannot search your car just to see what he turns up. There’s even less justification for searching a cellphone. Even with an arrest, a warrant may be required to search a closed container: Just last year, the Ohio Supreme Court held that a cellphone is analogous to a closed container and cannot be searched without a separate warrant—and that’s for a search where someone has actually been arrested for a crime, not mere snooping during a traffic stop.

Without an arrest, search requires probable cause—the officer must have some reasonable basis for believing that a crime has been committed, and that a particular search will turn up evidence relevant to that crime. It’s hard to see how cellphone data could be relevant to a traffic stop. Instead, searching cellphones looks more like a fishing expedition: Having gotten access to you with a traffic stop, officers are just looking around to see what they find. That’s explicitly forbidden by the Constitution, and with good reason. Letting government officials snoop on anyone they choose, for no particular reason, is a bad idea.

If you consent to a search, however, all bets are off. It’s hard to see why anyone would do so: If you’re a criminal, you’ve got something to hide; and if you’re not a criminal, why would you want to let the police paw through your email? And remember that when you consent to have your smartphone searched, you’re also giving up data on all your contacts, who haven’t consented. The legal ramifications to that have yet to be worked out.

This is just the beginning of a new era of privacy invasions and legal complications, particularly those surrounding your phone or other mobile device. For example, your smartphone contains a lot more information about you than your emails and the numbers in your address book. Your phone knows where you’ve been and what you’ve done. Consider the recent revelations that Apple iPhones actually maintain an internal file of the user’s locations, one that is copied to the user’s computer when the phone is synchronized to iTunes. These phones may store as much as a year’s worth of location data—data that could be snooped by law enforcement, creditors, jealous spouses, or— more troubling, and probably more likely—hackers, malware operators and stalkers.

What happens if police gain access to all this information through your phone? Courts are only beginning to grapple with this. Take the question of location tracking: One federal magistrate has held that the government must have a warrant even to obtain cellphone tracking information from a cellular carrier. The cellphone system routinely logs which cell towers contact your phone as you travel about, and that data provides a pretty good map of your whereabouts. It’s a good enough map, the court decided, that police shouldn’t be able to access it without a warrant. Likewise, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., ruled that installing a GPS tracker in your car requires a warrant. However, other cases have held that putting GPS tracking devices on suspects’ cars doesn’t require a warrant—the argument is that whenever you drive your car, you’re in public view, and thus have no expectation of privacy regarding your whereabouts, so you’re not harmed by the tracking. (I feel certain, however, that if I went down to the nearest federal motor pool and installed GPS trackers on their vehicles, they’d take a different view.)

Experts have been warning of privacy threats for years, and for the most part the public has yawned. But the combination of devices that gather all sorts of information about you and law-enforcement agencies wanting to snoop on it has put us into a whole new ballgame.

This week, reports surfaced of police in Michigan using forensic devices that can quickly scan the contents of your phone during routine traffic stops. The Michigan State Police has denied using the devices without a warrant or consent, and PM columnist Glenn Reynolds argues that such searches would be illegal. But, he says, it’s the bigger picture that’s truly worrisome: The combination of smartphones loaded with data about you and law enforcement devices that can easily extract that information means that a privacy war is looming.

With the dawning of 21st century and with the current boom of technology we've come face to face to globalization. The creation of the social networks as well as the many technological advancements what in past days would have taken ages to deliver information today is simply solved with the press of the button "SEND".

As such, we come to the threshold where the line that defines privacy and public information becomes blurred. For example, for those who use the social network Facebook, as part of the Terms of Usage you agree on the moment you create your page that every information, media (photos, videos, submitted documents) belongs to facebook. Our lives are no longer our own. Sure people don't mind this at the beginning because most people don't even take the time to think of the repercussions this could have onward. As a user of facebook myself, I sometimes ponder if I should submit every aspect of my life to facebook as the majority seems to be doing.

In the past (which was mere days ago in the Technology Calendar) most people logged in to these social networks from either Desktops or Personal computers, but nowadays those habits seem to have become obsolete as well. Today it seems to be the norm to have a cellphone with internet access and the most usual function of such is to access Facebook (you'll notice I won't even bother to mention myspace for obvious reasons).

No citing the line of thought of the previously submitted news courtesy of Popular Mechanics.com, now that it has become a habit the usage of Forensic Tools in order to access the information of smartphones, I ponder on the possibility of whether or not the concept of private information will remain as we knew it. Is such usage of forensic tools even ethical? When and where it should be used and on whom?

Surely, most of the offsprings of this generation don't seem to take notice of this since they practically where born with a smartphone in their hands, but for those who came from the 1980's -1990's (the descendants of the Baby Boomers) we can't avoid noticing that the concept of privacy, as we know it, is also becoming obsolete.

In fact, with the rise of the technology one can not walk and act freely fearing that someone could capture our actions in one of these phones and submit it to either facebook or Youtube for others around the world to witness. Our personal lives are neither so personal nor our own anymore.

Now, should we simply comply and go with the flow our should we take a stand and demand back our privacy?

 

[der Astronom]

If there was no such thing as privacy, we couldn't enjoy sex. It would be considered public indecency otherwise. If there was no such thing as privacy, you couldn't practice your religion without being badgered by other people who don't agree with your beliefs. We have freedom of speech precisely so that we can criticize religion, but on the otherhand, you also have the freedom to choose what religion you want to be a part of. But it's hard to practice your own religion if you can't do it without being left alone. When you're in public, you can expect people to say anything about the things you believe, but when you have privacy, you don't have to be concerned with criticism.

There is one specific area that I think has always remained private, and for good reason--our thoughts. And I don't believe that thought is a crime because it is not action, and there is no necessary correlation between our thoughts and our actions. (Yes, some people have wild fantasies about murdering people, kinky sex or other strange things, or weird dreams. But that doesn't mean they actually want to kill people or have kinky sex. Furthermore, discussing things of a more controversial nature requires you to think about those things in the first place.)

 

[Dr. Percival Cox]

As such, we come to the threshold where the line that defines privacy and public information becomes blurred. For example, for those who use the social network Facebook, as part of the Terms of Usage you agree on the moment you create your page that every information, media (photos, videos, submitted documents) belongs to facebook. Our lives are no longer our own. Sure people don't mind this at the beginning because most people don't even take the time to think of the repercussions this could have onward. As a user of facebook myself, I sometimes ponder if I should submit every aspect of my life to facebook as the majority seems to be doing.

I know it sounds like a smartass answer but I think the obvious thing to do is to not get a Facebook. I don't own one. In fact, most of the information about me on the internet is completely false. I rarely use my real name or even a legitimate e-mail address (I do on here of course, but that's because I enjoy coming here and I need a place to send my password if I ever for some reason forget it). You're only as vulnerable as you allow yourself to be. No one can prove one way or the other that most of what I say about my personal life on this website isn't complete and utter bullshit.

 

[Dean Winchester]

I know it sounds like a smartass answer but I think the obvious thing to do is to not get a Facebook. I don't own one. In fact, most of the information about me on the internet is completely false. I rarely use my real name or even a legitimate e-mail address (I do on here of course, but that's because I enjoy coming here and I need a place to send my password if I ever for some reason forget it). You're only as vulnerable as you allow yourself to be. No one can prove one way or the other that most of what I say about my personal life on this website isn't complete and utter bullshit.

Actually it is a realist answer, not a smartass answer. You are right, we are as vulnerable as we allow ourselves to be. Then again, Facebook has been the most popular means of communication for people who are separated by the circumstances (militia, travels, etc) and perhaps the easiest way to get in touch with old friends you thought you would never see again.

 

[Dr. Percival Cox]

Actually it is a realist answer, not a smartass answer. You are right, we are as vulnerable as we allow ourselves to be. Then again, Facebook has been the most popular means of communication for people who are separated by the circumstances (militia, travels, etc) and perhaps the easiest way to get in touch with old friends you thought you would never see again.

I can't argue with that. I've actually been tempted to get a Facebook because there are people from high school that I actually miss. But I figure that if we were really that good of friends we would've kept talking after graduation without the aid of a website.

Now, I know for some older people, the situation is probably that they had a longtime friend move to another state or country, and I could probably understand that.

I've got a buddy who's pestering me to get a Facebook when I ship out but I'm not going to. I told him that I'm going to be getting a new phone when I get out and that we'd talk that way but for some reason he's insistent that Facebook is the way to go.

 

[Dean Winchester]

I can't argue with that. I've actually been tempted to get a Facebook because there are people from high school that I actually miss. But I figure that if we were really that good of friends we would've kept talking after graduation without the aid of a website.

Now, I know for some older people, the situation is probably that they had a longtime friend move to another state or country, and I could probably understand that.

I've got a buddy who's pestering me to get a Facebook when I ship out but I'm not going to. I told him that I'm going to be getting a new phone when I get out and that we'd talk that way but for some reason he's insistent that Facebook is the way to go.

Same reasons why I got a Facebook account. Many times I've been tempted to mass delete and simply lock my Facebook account for the same reasons you've stated, mostly because I disagree with most of the Terms of Usage imposed by Facebook (even though I hypocritically accepted them in order to create the account). The fact that they own everything I submit into Facebook makes me uneasy.

But I am shipping out to BCT/AIT this summer and will remain there until December probably more. Most of my family members got a Facebook to stay in touch since sometimes the phone is not so reliable.

 

[Shaissa]

I think that Privacy is kinda a dream in this day and age, yes there is privacy, but at this day and age you really can find out anything about anyone if you search hard enough, but as far as legal means, I mean I think this is going too far, but then again the government can pull this stuff up with a search warrant if they want... and if they use this device without your consent it is illegal as far as i can read it, but how far do we go to "protect ourselves" from threats? how far are we willing to give up our privacy for protection? this hasn't been the first debate on something that came out that was infecting our privacy and it wont be the last sadly.

 

[Davey Gaga]

I have a Facebook account. I'm quite active on it. There are compromising, story-telling pictures available there. I drunkenly post statuses that are embarassing at later dates. These are, however, examples of things I normally don't care about. I'm not bothered that the entire digital world sees my big left moob or if the girl I'm seeing notices that I said I wasn't getting any of FB (p.s. I wish this subject wasn't so close to my heart, FML) but at the end of the day these are things that I don't mind sharing.

What I don't share is my mum's health issues. Or my financial status. Or my fantasies. Or secrets my friends have confided in me. I choose not to spread them and so they're kept private.

Yes, personal info is more readily available online but if you're worried then don't share. Draw the lines yourself beforehand and not in hindsight.

 

[Shaissa]

But even if you dont get facebook or even a computer, there still electronic information about you out there, everything from simply having a bank account or a job even, phone number, they can find out a lot about you with soo few things right now, like with this device there talking about, I know a cop that has used it, its amazing how much they can get from just your phone, numbers you call the most, people you text, what they said, words you use the most, its very scary what they can get with just a phone, imagine that with a bank account or even a computer. Once again, I think Privacy is just a dream now days, but again the question is, Do we want to be safe or do want our privacy more? rather a cop catches a guy planning on doing murder before it happens, or rather they keep the privacy of people? It's all a huge debate which I'm sure no one wants to get into.

 

[blakstang98]

I'm not so sure I care for the idea of phone contents being viewable by the public. Especially with the example they gave about policemen searching your phone contents during a routine stop. Sure, there could be some damning evidence in there. Maybe they'll even find John Gotti this way. But I'm thinking that who you talk and/or text message is really none of the cops' business. I'm sure there are some that would not react kindly to this. Especially if they have some very compromising stuff in their phone.

As for privacy in general, I think there are some very invasive things out there that make you almost completely vulnerable. I mean, you can never really keep everything private, no matter what precautions you take. The only factor is how hard someone will try to hunt your information down. It's pretty bad in my opinion. I'm sure all of us have at least one person that's been in their past that they'd rather not have know all about them. Thank you, modern technology. !

 

[Rapture]

I heard about what the Michigan police were doing on the news as well. Its sick really. The worst part about it is who knows how they are storing the information that they get and how securely it is being stored. Someone could hack into where they are storing it and then your info can get released into who even knows hands. Then it creates a liability for the police and a stupid one at that because if something did happen they would never assume responsibility. Why do they even need the info if they find nothing incriminating anyways?

There really is no such thing as privacy nowadays. The police are even out there data mining. We have big brother cams that monitor the traffic on the highways...data apps on our phones that track where we are and what we are doing...

Apple is taking some big privacy hits now with their Iphone. I watched on the news last night about how they had tracked everywhere Barbara Walters had been in the last month based on the location of her Iphone. Not just countries and cities...but restaurants and EXACT locations...pretty creepy huh? So glad I don't have an Iphone...and I don't plan on buying one. They don't even encrypt the info they steal...which will likely end up being a hackers heaven.

I also got rid of my facebook...it just isn't worth it. There is little privacy there as well...and if they end up getting hacked, there again is no liability for the people who are expoited by their negligence.

Its a world of living by technology nowadays with little thought being put into how to properly secure the information that is being shared by the devices and websites that we use...and I don't see the government stepping in anytime soon to stick up for our right to a degree of privacy.

 

[Valvalis]

I think it is extremely dangerous to have any systems in which a government, corporation, agency, or individual has access to everyone's personal information. I mean, we don't know these people All these CEOs, government officials, etc., we don't know them personally. Who are they? What do they do in their free time? What was their reason for wanting to come to power, and what are they planning on doing with that power?

There is an incredible potential for the personal information of others to be misused, and to trust an institution (Facebook etc.) with your personal info simply because they offer you a "Disclaimer" or "Terms of Service," is not really a great idea, imho. They can make themselves look as safe and user-friendly as they want, but all it takes is one corrupt employee to do the wrong thing with your info, and you're screwed. There can't always be preventitive measures either, to keep that corrupt person from obtaining a job that allows them that kind of power. If someone is street smart enough, they can just put on a facade of being honest and playing by the rules; from looking at the news, it seems easy enough to do that without being caught in most cases until after the damage has already been done, and not every bad person is going to give off an aura that they're up to something bad, or leave a paper trail.

That being said, I try to give as little info as possible to anyone, especially when dealing with companies or the government. Granted the government likes to get lots of info from you , but I certainly only wish to give what's required and nothing more.

IMO, humans started to lose their personal privacy the second they started living in groups together--ages ago in our history. However, our access to privacy has varied over the ages. When towns were small and everyone knew your business, it would have been hard to get privacy. However, now that we can live close together in cities fairly anonymously, our records have to be maintained by agencies because there are so many of us to keep track of, so we lose our privacy there too. So since social living seems to mandate a lack of privacy in some form, it seems like the only way to even get a chance at privacy would be to live as a hermit out in the wilderness somewhere--if you're lucky enough to not be found by anyone.

Self-sufficiency is the #1 key to privacy I think, because it puts your social interaction under your control, but sadly there are probably few people left in the world who could be considered 100% self-sufficient. When people could make their own houses, clothes, and food, for example, they could have lived in a state of privacy and isolation far more easily.

With territories across the world divided up and put under the control of governments, I think it would be hard to find a place to live where you could get away with not giving your private info to institutions, but I guess *maybe* it might still be possible for survivalists out in certain wilderness areas to avoid having to give others their private information? Not really sure on that one, but even if it's required by law to give up your info, it might still be possible for people to avoid doing so if they didn't mind breaking the law

 

[Linnaete]

What worries me in particular is that since the advent and rapid development of the internet, anything can now be publicised to the world, particularly on websites such as Youtube. If you were inadvertently filmed doing something stupid perhaps out of drunken hysteria on one occasion, then about 400,000 people the next day could be viewing that through Youtube. Likewise through a brief lapse of judgement or once again being drunk, you end up with a comment or a photo on Facebook that you will most likely regret permanently afterwards. You have reports of employers firing employees because of things like little berating comments about them or their firm on Facebook - or even for an appropriate image. It isn't right that an employer can do that purely because he or she was going through your Facebook page. People have their own personal lives, they're free to think whatever they want or do what they want as long as it doesn't directly affect you in some enormous way.

At the same time though, there's the argument that if it's on Facebook or on the internet in general, it's there. You put it on the internet, you're essentially consenting towards hurtling that through the boundaries between privacy and public information. Of course, one can see why. If I want to say for example that my boss is a fucking wanker and it's on my Facebook page and he sees it, subsequently firing me, I was the one who risked that. Sure, I would be fucking pissed that he was going through my Facebook (though in reality I doubt he can even see my Wall) but at the same time I put it up there, I am not entirely blameless. Although with Youtube, that's a bit more dangerous. A video of yourself doing something stupid - say, vandalising a London landmark or something while on a riot (perhaps not the best example as you are being a bit of a dick there xD) - can instantly make you visible to the world and people can ridicule or condemn or just laugh at this person of whom they have never seen before. This is of course, not mitigated by the press which is always keen to oh, I dunno, phone tap nowadays? See News of the World.

About the smartphone thing well, I suppose it's good if the police are stopping an actual criminal, but if it's used on a motorist who is stopped for whatever reason, then I'm not too comfortable - though not that it's anything of a crisis of course. I'm not actually expecting many motorists being stopped and their information being looked through all the time at all. Having all that data in one place however particularly as it can be broken into by other parties for their own benefit just screams trouble, even if there is necessity in. That's the problem with technology in general. It's damn useful, yet is a huge double-edged sword, and that's just the internet. With the internet, you risk your privacy being broadcasted to the world or broken into by internet hackers even if unintentionally did so in the first place. Privacy is not totally dead at all but it is being heavily eroded away by technology and even moreso now that technology becomes more and more advanced. It's so useful and nice to have, but it has its huge cons. And a desperately nosey media running around looking for scoops.

 

[Morrigan]

I too do have a Facebook account,but I don't use much anymore.I just keep it for the time being to keep contact with certain people,since I don't have a mobile phone yet.Once I get one probably,either I'll never log into it or just close it.I just log in to look if I have any PMs cause I rarely make any updates.Plus it's not a place to meet people.I am not saying that it's dangerous and there are lots of psychoes in the internet cause the truth is that the same exist in RL too,so no difference,just that friendship cannot be cultivated and developed through chatting and internet.People bond through experience,not just impresonal talking withe ach other.
Other than that whoever wants to keep it let them do so.The only think I like about it is the games and quizes,XD.
As far as privacy is concerned...I really hate when people are all about "OMG,what a pic!I am gonna immediately uploaded in FB" or whatever.I remember someone told me that with a picture of my own taken by them and I was like "WTF?I don't think I agreed on that" and yelling at her.I just don't get it what gives the right to someone other than oneself to upload a terrible pic of someone else.Be it their brother,sister,best friend,classmate etc.Other than our own lives,you can wonder about privacy seeing how celebrities are treated.Just because you appear on the big screen or the TV,doesn't make it right to have someone follow you around trying to take embarrassing pics of someone famous to make the headlines of a magazine.People are generally very obsessed with knowing information about others,but I think this is a bit too much.If this is the situation now I magine in the future.
We still have some privacy left as common people but where technology is going I am not sure it can continue being this way.I have heard some pretty freaky stuff and having chips in our bodies.I don't know if something like this will really happen or is already happen but if there's such a possibility,then I am not wondering why some people believe the world is heading towards the end.Not only is that something concerning the privacy department but is also related to control.That means that all of us will be controlled every second of the day and it'll be like not owning ourselves.Maybe I am exaggerating on this who knows...But there are so many things being said about the technology of the future.Also seeing how fast the technology is advancing,it's not unlikely to imagine a future like that.