Survey of Americans' Privacy Habits Post-Snowden

Pew Research has a new survey on Americans’ privacy habits in a post-Snowden world.

The 87% of those who had heard at least something about the programs were asked follow-up questions about their own behaviors and privacy strategies:

34% of those who are aware of the surveillance programs (30% of all adults) have taken at least one step to hide or shield their information from the government. For instance, 17% changed their privacy settings on social media; 15% use social media less often; 15% have avoided certain apps and 13% have uninstalled apps; 14% say they speak more in person instead of communicating online or on the phone; and 13% have avoided using certain terms in online communications.

[…]

25% of those who are aware of the surveillance programs (22% of all adults) say they have changed the patterns of their own use of various technological platforms “a great deal” or “somewhat” since the Snowden revelations. For instance, 18% say they have changed the way they use email “a great deal” or “somewhat”; 17% have changed the way they use search engines; 15% say they have changed the way they use social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook; and 15% have changed the way they use their cell phones.

Also interesting are the people who have not changed their behavior because they’re afraid that it would lead to more surveillance. From pages 22-23 of the report:

Still, others said they avoid taking more advanced privacy measures because they believe that taking such measures could make them appear suspicious:

“There’s no point in inviting scrutiny if it’s not necessary.”

“I didn’t significantly change anything. It’s more like trying to avoid anything questionable, so as not to be scrutinized unnecessarily.

“[I] don’t want them misunderstanding something and investigating me.”

There’s also data about how Americans feel about government surveillance:

This survey asked the 87% of respondents who had heard about the surveillance programs: “As you have watched the developments in news stories about government monitoring programs over recent months, would you say that you have become more confident or less confident that the programs are serving the public interest?” Some 61% of them say they have become less confident the surveillance efforts are serving the public interest after they have watched news and other developments in recent months and 37% say they have become more confident the programs serve the public interest. Republicans and those leaning Republican are more likely than Democrats and those leaning Democratic to say they are losing confidence (70% vs. 55%).

Moreover, there is a striking divide among citizens over whether the courts are doing a good job balancing the needs of law enforcement and intelligence agencies with citizens’ right to privacy: 48% say courts and judges are balancing those interests, while 49% say they are not.

At the same time, the public generally believes it is acceptable for the government to monitor many others, including foreign citizens, foreign leaders, and American leaders:

  • 82% say it is acceptable to monitor communications of suspected terrorists
  • 60% believe it is acceptable to monitor the communications of American leaders.
  • 60% think it is okay to monitor the communications of foreign leaders
  • 54% say it is acceptable to monitor communications from foreign citizens

Yet, 57% say it is unacceptable for the government to monitor the communications of U.S. citizens. At the same time, majorities support monitoring of those particular individuals who use words like “explosives” and “automatic weapons” in their search engine queries (65% say that) and those who visit anti-American websites (67% say that).

[…]

Overall, 52% describe themselves as “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” about government surveillance of Americans’ data and electronic communications, compared with 46% who describe themselves as “not very concerned” or “not at all concerned” about the surveillance.

It’s worth reading these results in detail. Overall, these numbers are consistent with a worldwide survey from December. The press is spinning this as “Most Americans’ behavior unchanged after Snowden revelations, study finds,” but I see something very different. I see a sizable percentage of Americans not only concerned about government surveillance, but actively doing something about it. “Third of Americans shield data from government.” Edward Snowden’s goal was to start a national dialog about government surveillance, and these surveys show that he has succeeded in doing exactly that.

More news.

Posted on March 31, 2015 at 2:49 PM32 Comments

Comments

John Macdonald March 31, 2015 3:43 PM

1 in 3 is taking action because they are afraid of government spying, but another large chunk are afraid to take action for the same reason. That adds up to a serious indication of distrust for the government.

Logan March 31, 2015 4:36 PM

I haven’t changed anything, but that’s because I was already operating under the assumption that everything I did was being intercepted.

65535 March 31, 2015 5:11 PM

I notice people are reluctant to talk about important subjects unless it is person to person [Financial, legal, and medical]. They are less trusting of their cell phones.

I am beginning to see some boiler plate privacy statement at the bottom of people’s emails to me. I don’t know if this boiler plate works – it looks impressive [I have seen on attorney emails, average Joe’s/Janes and international emails].

One thing is sure – I have changed my electronic habits after reading “We hunt system admins” line.

I have quit using Google search and use Duckduckgo, and Ixquick https, no scripts, try to visit only https enabled sites. I would guess others have done the same thing.

On the bright side, I find my “no cell phone” at this house policy helpful. Things are more peaceful. There is not that aggravating twinge when some kid’s cell phone loudly rings. The irritation is now moved to his parents house.

EvilKiru March 31, 2015 6:34 PM

Boilerplate that aims to assert confidentiality to emails is pretty much meaningless.

I base this on the attorney for my mother’s estate telling me he doesn’t use email for client correspondence because Michigan case law explicitly denies confidentiality to email correspondence and he was unaware of any state explicitly granting confidentiality to emails, even in the face of boilerplate asserting confidentiality. This was about 4 years ago.

Impurist March 31, 2015 6:36 PM

100ppl –87%–> 87ppl –34%–> 29ppl

Seriously? Only 29% of Americans care about NSA scandal!?
America is not a freedom country anymore lol

…erm,

@65536
I would guess others have done the same thing

Me? Sure, why not.

Search Engine: Startpage and Ixquick (because duckduckgo sux)
Mail: Personal VPS, running email server (Don’t trust GMail!!)
Mail-Encryption: PGP.
Web proxy: VPN and Tor. (Don’t buy VPN which company locate inside the US!)
Web Blocker: NoScript. RefModifier. Adblock. (Use http://tinyurl.com/olpbcm3 for adblock)
Phone: I can’t change it, but I asked ppl to use PGP email instead. (No Skype of course)
OS: Linux. (Windows is for noobs or gamers)

You might want to visit this website: https://prism-break.org
Security is about anonymity and privacy.
If you’re not aware of NSA, your company should not talk about security.

65535 March 31, 2015 8:02 PM

@EvilKiru

“Boilerplate that aims to assert confidentiality to emails is pretty much meaningless.”

That’s my first guess. But, I see lawyers using it from two different states. One of those states is directly below Michigan.

I also see boilerplate from EU. They might have some legal standing in the EU because of stricter privacy laws – but who knows.

@ Impurist

“Search Engine: Startpage and Ixquick (because duckduckgo sux)
“Mail: Personal VPS, running email server (Don’t trust GMail!!)
“Mail-Encryption: PGP.
“Web proxy: VPN and Tor. (Don’t buy VPN which company locate inside the US!)
“Web Blocker: NoScript. RefModifier. Adblock. (Use http://tinyurl.com/olpbcm3 for adblock)
“Phone: I can’t change it, but I asked ppl to use PGP email instead. (No Skype of course)
“OS: Linux. (Windows is for noobs or gamers)” –Impurist

Wow, nice setup!

Interesting comment on the phone problem.

Prism-break[dot]org is duly book marked. Thanks.

David Henderson March 31, 2015 8:36 PM

I wonder if any of Treadmill’s links have images, pdf’s or audio that can install malware on systems with vulnerable jpg viewer, pdf readers, or audio/flash players.

65535 March 31, 2015 8:46 PM

@ Treadmill

Ha! Fearless Fosdick damages the people he supposed to protect. That is fairly accurate picture of the NSA/CIA/FBI/TSA.

Kabuki Intrasolar March 31, 2015 8:57 PM

34% of those who are aware of the surveillance programs (30% of all adults) have taken at least one step to hide or shield their information from the government.

Am I misreading this, or is the survey claiming that 70% of American adults are not aware of the government surveillance programs? How is that remotely possible? Or is their intended meaning that the 34% of those who have heard of the programs constitute 30% of all adults, implying that 88% of adults have heard of the programs?

Kabuki Intrasolar March 31, 2015 8:58 PM

Ugh, disregard above, the answer is literally in the second sentence of this post.

Steve March 31, 2015 9:18 PM

Personally, I’ve just stopped caring.

No use creating inconvenience for myself when there’s no way to beat them at their own game by their rules for their benefit.

Simply assume that everything that isn’t inside your own head is monitored, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. I may not be a number but I’m not a free man, either.

Greg March 31, 2015 9:54 PM

“majorities support monitoring of those particular individuals who use words like “explosives” and “automatic weapons” in their search engine queries”

This is sad because one of the foremost experts on violence prediction, Gavin de Becker, who has written books on this has made clear that predictive analyses that are based on “key words” are next to useless. He discusses this at length in his book The Gift of Fear.

DB March 31, 2015 11:55 PM

@ Greg

Indeed. What it does is cause people to fear using search engines. For example I have a friend who warned his kids not to research guns on the internet. They are not murderers, they don’t even own guns, they were merely curious. He’s afraid of inviting an investigation against his family if anyone at his house puts that into search engines now.

I told him not to worry, he is certainly already under investigation anyway, because I post to blogs like Schneier’s here, and I visited his house, and used his internet from my laptop… I even call him from my phone so he’s in my metadata… that made him feel much better, of course. 😛

P.S. Hi NSA Agent monitoring my internet, yes, you know which friend this is….

m74ed7u945o April 1, 2015 12:29 AM

@Steve: “Personally, I’ve just stopped caring. No use creating inconvenience for myself when there’s no way to beat them at their own game by their rules for their benefit. Simply assume that everything that isn’t inside your own head is monitored, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered.”

You don’t care. Whatever, your loss. Most of us are on this site because we do care.

Thankfully, encryption has been proven to beat them, and math doesn’t go by their rules. There is also provably unbreakable encryption. They can be beaten and the tools are readily available.

You don’t care because it’s more convenient for you to not care. Your house may be on fire, but it’s more convenient to continue sitting on the couch inside, right? What a sad world if all we cared about was convenience.

Gerard van Vooren April 1, 2015 12:46 AM

If someone still believes it is all about catching terrorists, he/she didn’t pay attention. To me, that is the main message of Snowden. And he is still paying the price for saying it.

Eyatgatabat April 1, 2015 1:40 AM

Many, many people that are super-concerned about this are of the “don’t invite more scrutiny” mindset. Many people are scared.

keiner April 1, 2015 2:52 AM

“Edward Snowden’s goal was to start a national dialog…”

Reeeaaaallllly? Not change something regarding the illegal spying? Not bringing those guys to justice? Not implementing safe crypto in the first place?

Just a little “national dialog”? The price is to high for that. And there is no reason why to stop at a “national dialog”. It’s time to change things NOW. Otherwise they will NEVER change.

But to be honest: They WILL never change. People are to dumb.

keiner April 1, 2015 2:55 AM

“Eyatgatabat • April 1, 2015 1:40 AM

Many, many people that are super-concerned about this are of the “don’t invite more scrutiny” mindset. Many people are scared.”

Yeah, exactly the mindset that made the communist regimen work in the eastern part of Europe for nearly half a century. Or in North Korea, or … or … or…

Wherever you have a totalitarian regime.

Tim April 1, 2015 4:17 AM

My concern with all this is that issues relating to encryption and mass computer surveillance are misunderstood by the general public in the same way that money is misunderstood.

Monetary reform is generally a hopeless crusade because the barrier to understanding the issues is just too high for otherwise disinterested passers by to connect with. Abuses of mass surveillance and big data approaches, information arbitrages on a massive scale – in my view the dangerous parts of the NSA’s activities – have exactly the same issue. The general public’s opinion will be putty (unfortunately not PuTTY) in the hands of states who have an incentive to misguide them.

Readers of Schneier on Security have a very rare perspective – I don’t take heart in your interpretation of those statistics.

65535 April 1, 2015 6:03 AM

@ Tim

“…in my view the dangerous parts of the NSA’s activities – have exactly the same issue. The general public’s opinion will be putty (unfortunately not PuTTY) in the hands of states who have an incentive to misguide them.”

I think it is already happening. I would guess there is an army of K street “consultants” posting misleading items on various forums [some may show up here] to misdirect the public. The amount of misinformation is so high that the public is totally scammed and cannot tell the difference.

I believe that the media is under the thumb of these NSA K. street consultants and rarely tells the truth. So, the vast majority of media outlets are giving false information.

Another problem is business conflicts. Various makers of secure devices, software, and hardware have and incentive to sell NSA pwnd devices and don’t want to hurt sales. Hence, there is little news from these vendors about the NSA spy machine and the dangers – it could lower revenues.

[Next, to restructure the “forging engine” question]

We know that bogus/forged certs should be flagged by our browser and/or Operating System. I am not sure if all certificates incoming and out going need to be forged to enable SSL stripping.

Maybe, only the certificate placed on the victim client machine only needs forging. When the SSL/TLS connection is made to another machine the victim client doesn’t show a bogus cert or bad SSL connection. Thus, only one bogus certificate per victim machine needs to be forged.

Although, when visiting many sites including banking sites, one would assume that the victim client machine’s SSL certificate would raise a certificate warning with the bank’s web site. I wonder how these SSL strippers get around that problem.

Anon April 1, 2015 7:03 AM

‘m74ed7u945o’ – What I think ‘Steve’ was getting at is that if a government agency wants in, they’ll get in. Bruce Schneier has already echoed these sentiments on this blog.

Whether you’re using PGP or OTR if your connection is monitored they’ll get the encrypted data. If you’re using an operating system like Windows or Linux they can get your keys and decrypt the data through software backdoors/’errors’. If you use TOR you risk the endpoints being monitored. Even ‘anonymous’ VPNs normally keep logs.

There was a scheme exposed by Snowden where laptops were intercepted in the post, have hardware installed to capture data, re-sealed and sent to the recipient.

Plenty more possibilities are out there including covert cameras etc.

All you can do is make it more difficult for them and prevent easy dragnet surveillance. But that brings us back to the point – if they want in; they’re in.

Chelloveck April 1, 2015 10:06 AM

@Impurist: Given all your personal security measures I’m surprised you’d actually encourage others to click an anonymous shortened URL to download AdBlock. Just testing our gullibility? 🙂

vas pup April 1, 2015 12:01 PM

“Moreover, there is a striking divide among citizens over whether the courts are doing a good job balancing the needs of law enforcement and intelligence agencies with citizens’ right to privacy: 48% say courts and judges are balancing those interests[never had direct personal experience with legal system or have big wallet to hire high profile lawyer – VP] , while 49% say they are not [on the other side of experience and wealth – VP].

insert_ip_here April 1, 2015 1:56 PM

The “general public” watches ‘Tiara-Wearing Swamp Pawnbroker House-Flippers of Alaska’, wolfs down “food” with fake grill marks, and thinks encryption refers to people with physical disabilities. Fortunately, surveys of what they think/hope/wish/feel/opine/daydream are one of the few sources of real entertainment left here in Rome 2.0.

searx April 1, 2015 11:46 PM

Hi bone drone!
I wanted to thank you very much for the link to searx, it took awhile to get all the dependencies in place but after that it started to work, the only tuning ive done sofar is to only use:
searchpage,ixquick and duckduckgo as general search engines and to set the timeout from 2 sec to 5-6 seconds, since startpage and ixquick seems to time out otherwise.
also get some warning about “util cant have locale set to all” but dont know what it meens yet.

Havent looked into torrifying it yet but sofar so good, VERY nice to have all searches in one interface! happy happy

BlackVPN April 2, 2015 3:07 AM

@Chelloveck
“click an anonymous shortened URL to download AdBlock”

Sometimes, Shortened URL will protect you from the website looking at your Referrer header.
Not about gullibility test I assume.

moo April 2, 2015 4:05 PM

Chilling effects are for real. This panopticon is the very opposite of freedom. We’ve become as bad as the totalitarian states we were so afraid of during the Cold War era.

Randy April 3, 2015 1:36 PM

Pentagon Personnel Now Talking on ‘NSA-Proof’ Smartphones
http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/nsa-smartphone-pentagon-20150331

March 31, 2015 The Defense Department has rolled out supersecret smartphones for work and maybe play, made by anti-government-surveillance firm Silent Circle, according to company officials.

Silent Circle, founded by a former Navy Seal and the inventor of privacy-minded PGP encryption, is known for decrying federal efforts to bug smartphones. And for its spy-resistant “blackphone.”

Apparently, troops don’t like busybodies either. As part of limited trials, U.S. military personnel are using the device, encrypted with secret code down to its hardware, to communicate “for both unclassified and classified” work, Silent Circle Chairman Mike Janke told Nextgov.

Leeroy April 3, 2015 2:48 PM

I believe once people start understanding more about how mass surveillance impacts their freedom of expression, thoughts, democracy, and way of life. The poll numbers will start leaning heavily against mass surveillance.

Mass surveillance is still a new concept to people. We’ve only officially known about it for 2 years now. Society is still learning what mass surveillance actually means and how it effects us.

Governments do their best to keep their mass surveillance efforts a secret. Somebody in government once said, “Spying on someone isn’t a violation of privacy if they have no idea they’re being spied on”.

Fortunately, the more governments act on the information they glean from mass surveillance. The more obvious is becomes to the general population that mass surveillance is being deployed and used against them.

NSAI April 3, 2015 3:09 PM

“Spying on someone isn’t a violation of privacy if they have no idea they’re being spied on”.

“You know that adage about the monkeys? The one that postulates that, if you put a thousand monkeys in front of a thousand typewriters and train them to hit random keys, eventually one of them would type out the complete works of Shakespeare? Well, apparently we are the monkeys and Twitter is the typewriter, and we are all working in a literary sweatshop run by the mighty ANAGRAMATRON.”
http://www.avclub.com/article/anagramatron-reveals-twitters-hidden-synchronicity-208114

They have no idea they are monkeys either.

Leave a comment

Login

Allowed HTML <a href="URL"> • <em> <cite> <i> • <strong> <b> • <sub> <sup> • <ul> <ol> <li> • <blockquote> <pre> Markdown Extra syntax via https://michelf.ca/projects/php-markdown/extra/

Sidebar photo of Bruce Schneier by Joe MacInnis.