Regulating cyberspace: Security vs user privacy
The debate is between users’ privacy and governments wanting to prevent crimes through surveillance
The terrorist attacks in London last weekend have resulted in a strong demand from British PM Theresa May for cyberspace and social media to be regulated. Recently, the European Union Justice Commissioner for Human Rights Vera Jourová had alluded to proposing three or four plans in June this year that would require encrypted communications to provide law enforcement access to encrypted data with a swift and reliable response in a mix of voluntary and mandatory options. The latest Google transparency report claimed that it received 45,000 government requests for user data worldwide between July and December 2016, with 31,000 of them coming from outside the US.
Clearly a situation has emerged where the balance or imbalance between privacy and security concerns are hitting us right in the face and there is no clear solution. Social media in the last decade has become a sort of force multiplier for terrorists and other violent extremist groups in terms of communication. This has been further complicated with the introduction of encryption for communications over the internet. While encryption is a legitimate tool for ensuring privacy and security for the network and its users, it has also offered opportunities for terrorists and criminals to hide many of their nefarious activities. Their emergence has made terrorists reduce their recourse to code languages and steganography, which allowed at least some form of tracing possibilities. Since April 2016, when Whatsapp incorporated end to end encryption for all messages sent via the app, the matter of finding a workable balance between privacy and security has become the concern of many stakeholders.
The situation is no better in India. A public interest litigation case on the Whatsapp privacy policy is being heard by a five- judge constitution bench in the Supreme Court of India and most of the substantial issues are being discussed including the vexed issue of privacy vs security. The department of telecom in its deposition in early April this year mentioned to the apex court its plan to put in place a regulatory mechanism for OTT platforms.
So what are the solutions and is there a workable mechanism in the context of growing legitimate security demands, the march of technology and the past response from OTTs? Clearly cyberspace has to remain a free medium and not become a surveillance domain to allow all forms of surveillance in the name of security. Meanwhile the EU Justice Commissioner’s expected points could help the discourse move in a more focused direction.