Slashdot Mirror
Americans Show 'Surprising Willingness' To Accept Internet Surveillance (dailydot.com)
Researchers from BYU recently took a survey of internet users (PDF), mostly from the U.S., to determine how they balanced opinions of security and privacy. They found, perhaps surprisingly, that over 90% of users are fine with somebody snooping their encrypted traffic, so long as they were informed of the snooping. Most of them also supported legislation requiring notification and/or consent. "Most respondents also agreed that employers should be able to monitor the encrypted Internet connections of employees even without notification or consent, especially when an employee used a company computer. There was less agreement when it came to employees using personal devices; approximately a third of respondents opposed surveillance in that case."
That said, "Despite accepting surveillance in a number of situations, 60 percent of respondents said that they would react negatively if they discovered that a network they currently use employed TLS proxies." The study also found 4.5% of participants were "jaded" toward the state of privacy and security on the internet, feeling that their traffic is already monitored, and that the government would circumvent whatever technologies we put in place to protect it. The researchers say this group "once cared about these issues but has lost all hope and has largely given up on ever achieving a secure world."
That said, "Despite accepting surveillance in a number of situations, 60 percent of respondents said that they would react negatively if they discovered that a network they currently use employed TLS proxies." The study also found 4.5% of participants were "jaded" toward the state of privacy and security on the internet, feeling that their traffic is already monitored, and that the government would circumvent whatever technologies we put in place to protect it. The researchers say this group "once cared about these issues but has lost all hope and has largely given up on ever achieving a secure world."
I work in network security, but I'm also highly sensitive to snooping and privacy issues. If you own it, you should be able to see the traffic. If you own the home or business network and home or business computer, then you should be able to see what is going on within that network and computer regardless of who is using it. I do need to draw a huge distinction between a privately owned systems and networks versus systems that qualify as service or carrier networks. If you sell or re-sell bandwidth then you should NOT have ability to view that traffic. On a similar note, encryption should be able to be used against the owner of devices. All encrypted traffic generated from apps/services on a device should be viewable clear-text by the owner of the device. Too often nowadays, encryption is used to the detriment of owners. Same goes for computer code. i.e. the Volkswagen scandel. Owners should have the option to see and review everything that occurs in their devices. That (transparency) is the *** ONLY *** way that companies will ever stop doing what they do.
Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
I'm thinking it might be an issue with the wording.
For example, I'm against dragnet gathering of information. I'm against unwarranted snooping and such. What I want and what I'd accept is getting a third party to authorize it on their name in a case by case basis. Ya' know. A Warrant. In many cases where they could have gotten one after the fact, they didn't bother. This is why I'm against it. I'm also against agencies tracking behavior for ad revenue. I'd say I hate that more than anything else. Even if nothing comes of it, I consider it an unwarranted dragnet approach, where it can become an easy vector for other agencies to know more about me when I don't want them to know about me.