Essays in the Category "Privacy and Surveillance"

Page 14 of 16

Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee

  • Bruce Schneier
  • May 8, 2007

Testimony of Bruce Schneier
Security technologist, author, founder and CTO of BT Counterpane

“Will REAL ID Actually Make Us Safer?
An Examination of Privacy and Civil Liberties Concerns”

Senate Judiciary Committee
Room 226, Dirksen Senate Office Building
Tuesday, May 8, 2007

STATEMENT

I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the Committee today to discuss privacy issues. My name is Bruce Schneier. I am a security technologist, author, and CTO of BT Counterpane. The expertise I bring to this committee is less in the privacy and civil liberties realms, and more in the security realm. As such, I will focus my comments on the insecurities of the REAL ID system, the ineffectiveness of identity-based security systems, and the need to find smart and effective solutions to new security challenges. I’d like to emphasize at the start that this is an enormously interesting, important, and subtle topic, and I appreciate the decision of the Committee to hold these hearings…

Is Big Brother a Big Deal?

  • Bruce Schneier
  • Information Security
  • May 2007

This essay appeared as part of a point-counterpoint with Marcus Ranum. Marcus’s side, to which this is a response, can be found on his website.

Big Brother isn’t what he used to be. George Orwell extrapolated his totalitarian state from the 1940s. Today’s information society looks nothing like Orwell’s world, and watching and intimidating a population today isn’t anything like what Winston Smith experienced.

Data collection in 1984 was deliberate; today’s is inadvertent. In the information society, we generate data naturally. In Orwell’s world, people were naturally anonymous; today, we leave digital footprints everywhere…

Camera Phones vs. Crime: Now We're Talking

  • Bruce Schneier
  • New York Daily News
  • January 19, 2007

On Wednesday, Mayor Bloomberg announced that New York will be the first city with 911 call centers able to receive images and videos from cell phones and computers. If you witness a crime, you can not only call in – you can send in a picture or video as well.

This is a great idea that can make us all safer. Often the biggest problem a 911 operator has is getting enough good information from the caller. Sometimes the caller is emotionally distraught. Sometimes there’s confusion and background noise. Sometimes there’s a language barrier. Giving callers the opportunity to use all the communications tools at their disposal will help operators dispatch the right help faster…

On Police Security Cameras

Wholesale Surveillance

  • Bruce Schneier
  • San Francisco Chronicle
  • January 16, 2007

San Francisco police have a new law enforcement tool: a car-mounted license-plate scanner. Similar to a radar gun, it reads the license plates of moving or parked cars—250 or more per hour—and links with remote police databases, immediately providing information about the car and its owner. Right now, the police check for unpaid parking tickets. A car that comes up positive on the database is booted.

On the face of it, this is nothing new. The police have always been able to run a license plate check. The difference is they would do it manually, and that limited its use. It simply wasn’t feasible for the police to run the plates of every car in a parking garage, or every car that passed through an intersection. What is different isn’t the police tactic, but the efficiency of the process…

Automated Targeting System

  • Bruce Schneier
  • Forbes
  • January 8, 2007

This article was published under the title “They’re Watching.”

If you’ve traveled abroad recently, you’ve been investigated. You’ve been assigned a score indicating what kind of terrorist threat you pose. That score is used by the government to determine the treatment you receive when you return to the U.S. and for other purposes as well.

Curious about your score? You can’t see it. Interested in what information was used? You can’t know that. Want to clear your name if you’ve been wrongly categorized? You can’t challenge it. Want to know what kind of rules the computer is using to judge you? That’s secret, too. So is when and how the score will be used…

Does Secrecy Help Protect Personal Information?

  • Bruce Schneier
  • Information Security
  • January 2007

This essay appeared as the second half of a point-counterpoint with Marcus Ranum. Marcus’s side can be found on his website.

Personal information protection is an economic problem, not a security problem. And the problem can be easily explained: The organizations we trust to protect our personal information do not suffer when information gets exposed. On the other hand, individuals who suffer when personal information is exposed don’t have the capability to protect that information.

There are actually two problems here: Personal information is easy to steal, and it’s valuable once stolen. We can’t solve one problem without solving the other. The solutions aren’t easy, and you’re not going to like them…

Casual Conversation, R.I.P.

  • Bruce Schneier
  • Forbes
  • October 18, 2006

The political firestorm over former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley’s salacious instant messages hides another issue, one about privacy. We are rapidly turning into a society where our intimate conversations can be saved and made public later. This represents an enormous loss of freedom and liberty, and the only way to solve the problem is through legislation.

Everyday conversation used to be ephemeral. Whether face-to-face or by phone, we could be reasonably sure that what we said disappeared as soon as we said it. Of course, organized crime bosses worried about phone taps and room bugs, but that was the exception. Privacy was the default assumption…

Lessons From the Facebook Riots

  • Bruce Schneier
  • Wired
  • September 21, 2006

Earlier this month, the popular social networking site Facebook learned a hard lesson in privacy. It introduced a new feature called “News Feeds” that shows an aggregation of everything members do on the site, such as added and deleted friends, a change in relationship status, a new favorite song, a new interest. Instead of a member’s friends having to go to his page to view any changes, these changes are all presented to them automatically.

The outrage was enormous. One group, Students Against Facebook News Feeds, amassed over 700,000 members. Members planned to protest at the company’s headquarters. Facebook’s founder was completely …

We're Giving Up Privacy and Getting Little in Return

Better to Put People, Not Computers, in Charge of Investigating Potential Plots

  • Bruce Schneier
  • Minneapolis Star Tribune
  • May 31, 2006

Collecting information about every American’s phone calls is an example of data mining. The basic idea is to collect as much information as possible on everyone, sift through it with massive computers, and uncover terrorist plots. It’s a compelling idea, and convinces many. But it’s wrong. We’re not going to find terrorist plots through systems like this, and we’re going to waste valuable resources chasing down false alarms. To understand why, we have to look at the economics of the system.

Data mining works best when you’re searching for a well-defined profile, a reasonable number of attacks per year, and a low cost of false alarms. Credit-card fraud is one of data mining’s success stories: All credit-card companies mine their transaction databases for data for spending patterns that indicate a stolen card…

The Eternal Value of Privacy

  • Bruce Schneier
  • Wired
  • May 18, 2006

Finnish translation
French translation [#1]
French translation [#2]
German translation
Italian translation
Japanese translation
Polish translation
Portuguese translation
Spanish translation

The most common retort against privacy advocates—by those in favor of ID checks, cameras, databases, data mining and other wholesale surveillance measures—is this line: “If you aren’t doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?”

Some clever answers: “If I’m not doing anything wrong, then you have no cause to watch me.” “Because the government gets to define what’s wrong, and they keep changing the definition.” “Because you might do something wrong with my information.” My problem with quips like these—as right as they are—is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It’s not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect…

Sidebar photo of Bruce Schneier by Joe MacInnis.