How to Convince Non-IT Friends that Privacy Matters?

mmtux writes: "As technology becomes more advanced, I am increasingly worried about privacy in all aspects of my life. Unfortunately, whenever I attempt to discuss the matter with my friends, they show little understanding and write me off as a hyper-neurotic IT student. They say they simply don't care that the data they share on social networks may be accessible by others, that some laws passed by governments today might be privacy-infringing and dangerous, or that they shouldn't use on-line banking without a virus scanner and a firewall. Have you ever attempted to discuss data security and privacy concerns with a friend who isn't tech-savvy? How do you convince the average modern user that they should think about their privacy and the privacy of others when turning on their computer?"

Comments

Re:Well, the following approaches are hit or miss.

[betterunixthanunix]

"Food for thought: when we get all riled up about privacy, are we any better than the crazies who rail about pedophiles on the internet and make it seem like there are bogeymen around every corner?"

No, because in the case of privacy, people are constantly trying to pry into each other's business. Speaking personally, I have had it confirmed at least once that an email sent to me had been maliciously faked in order to manipulate me, and I have had some circumstantial evidence that someone was reading email conversations I had with someone else. I've been approached by people who know that I am a programmer, and want to know if I could "hack into" someone else' email account so that they could read through it. This stuff isn't about the boogeyman government, it is about ordinary people who actually do have no respect for the privacy of others.

Here's another angle to consider: sometimes, a message is easily misinterpreted when read by an uninformed party. When I was in Junior High School, I was once accused of plotting to blow up the school because of a note I had written to a friend, which had been misread by a teacher who found it after class. It isn't so uncommon. There are a dozen different situations like this, where some message is ambiguous and should only be read by someone who is fully informed on the context.

Wireless

[solprovider]

Start by explaining a real-world current personal problem. (I do not crack so showing his bank balance is not possible.)

A friend loves his wireless laptop. We encrypted router communication at both homes. Explaining why encryption is needed led to an explanation of the dangers of handling financial transactions while wandering NYC -- that any open router could record everything including passwords and perform man-in-the-middle attacks to bypass SSL. Anybody willing to capture his information could; expecting those people not to use the information maliciously seems silly.

Once those dangers were understood, my friend was eager to hear about more insidious problems such as government policies (telecommunication recording), other insecure devices (iPhone), and deliberately open websites (Facebook).

Re:Some are actually opposed to privacy

[Christoph]

...people are even demonizing those who even bring up privacy as a concern.

I was sued in federal court for violating someone's right to privacy (06-cv-01164, D. Minn). I posted their photo on my website, and they sued to get it removed and get damages. I represented myself, had a trial Nov. 5th, and the verdict was issued last Friday. I won. Yes, I demonize the person who sued me over his exaggerated privacy concerns, which led to a baseless federal lawsuit that tried to quash my free speech rights. Their exaggerated privacy concerns were not harmless.

I've posted about this litigation on Slashdot before, but the verdict is in now so here's the URL again: Gregerson v. Vilana

The plus side of sharing private info on the web: I got to know my wife only after seeing her photo on her geocities page, scoping her out to see what the stranger from the other side of the world, who emailed me asking for a .pdf file, looked like (her formal writing style made her seem middle-aged, but her photo showed she was actually much younger, and we started corresponding).

I posted my own medical information online 10 years ago, which has since helped other patients. I posted info about my late brother's illness, also to help other patients, which it seems to have done. If you reply to this post and attack me over my health problems, or my deceased brother's illness, I don't think that exposes me as a bad person -- it exposes you as a jerk. If you won't hire me because of these things, I -- me, personally -- am OK with that.

Re:Some are actually opposed to privacy

[Poingggg]

Against the "I have nothing to fear because I have nothing to hide"-like arguments I always say that you don't know what you would want to have kept hidden in, say, 10 or 20 years from now.

Before WW2 the European Jews used the same argument that anyone was allowed to know they were Jewish when they allowed the registration of their religion. They were (sort of) right then, but we all know what happened in WW2, where the nazis made 'good' use of this registration.

You do not know who will use your data for what purposes. I read once that for every proposed law, before accepting it, one should imagine what his worst enemy would be able to do with it if he (the enemy) got the power. Wise words, in my opinion.