importance of internet privacy essay

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/why-security-and-privacy-matter-digital-world

Taking Measure

Just a Standard Blog

Why Security and Privacy Matter in a Digital World

One cannot pick up a newspaper, watch TV, listen to the radio, or scan the news on the internet without some direct or veiled reference to the lack of information security or intrusions into personal privacy. Many intrusions into government and private-sector systems have exposed sensitive mission, business and personal information. Every day it seems that more and more systems are breached and more and more personal information is made available either on the web or, worse, the dark web . Given this backdrop, it is often easy to get lost in the details of cybersecurity and privacy and the seemingly endless discussions about cyber attacks, system breaches, frameworks, requirements, controls, assessments, continuous monitoring and risk management and forget why security and personal privacy matter in an increasingly digital world.

We are witnessing and taking part in the greatest information technology revolution in the history of mankind as our society undergoes the transition from a largely paper-based world to a fully digital world. As part of that transformation, we continue to push computers closer to the edge. The “edge” today is the burgeoning and already vast world of the “Internet of Things,” or IoT. This new world consists of an incredibly diverse set of familiar everyday technologies, including dishwashers, refrigerators, cameras, DVRs, medical devices, satellites, automobiles, televisions, traffic lights, drones, baby monitors, building fire/security systems, smartphones and tablets. It also includes technologies that are perhaps less familiar to the average person but absolutely vital to maintaining and safeguarding the familiar world in which they live: advanced military weapons systems; industrial and process control systems that support power plants and the nationwide electric grid, manufacturing plants and water distribution plants; emergency response systems; banking and financial systems; and transportation systems—in short, our most critical infrastructure. Yes, we have fully embraced this emerging technology and pushed computers, software and devices everywhere to the edge of this new world. And as those technologies, both familiar and critical, become increasingly integrated with IoT, so does information , all kinds of information, including intellectual property and your personal information.

It goes without saying that innovations in information technology and IoT will continue to make us more productive, help us solve difficult and challenging problems, entertain us, allow us to communicate with virtually anyone in the world instantaneously, and provide all kinds of additional, and previously unimaginable, benefits. For instance, who wouldn’t want an app that tells you the optimal time to go to the restroom during the movie you’re about to see at your local theater? These new technologies are not only compelling, but also intoxicating and addicting—leaving us with a huge blind spot that puts us at great risk of losing our property, our privacy, our security and, in some cases, our lives.

We have built an incredibly complex information technology infrastructure consisting of millions of billions of lines of code, hardware platforms with integrated circuits on computer chips, and millions of applications on every type of computing platform from smart watches to mainframes. And right in the middle of all that complexity, your information is being routinely processed, stored and transmitted through global networks of connected systems. From a security and privacy perspective, we are not only concerned about the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data contained in the systems embedded deep in the nation’s critical infrastructure, but also of our personal information.

Recognizing the importance of both security and privacy safeguards for systems, organizations and individuals, NIST recently initiated several groundbreaking projects to bring these concepts closer together—to facilitate the development of stronger, more robust security and privacy programs and provide a unified approach for protecting all types of information, including personal information. The first installment in this new approach occurred with the release of NIST Special Publication 800-53, Revision 5 , which provided, for the first time in the standards community, a consolidated catalog of security and privacy controls—standing side by side with the broad-based safeguards needed to protect systems and personal privacy.

Today, NIST is announcing the second installment of the unified approach to privacy and security by releasing a discussion draft of NIST Special Publication 800-37, Revision 2 . This publication responds to the President’s Executive Order on Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure and the Office of Management and Budget’s Memorandum M-17-25 (implementation guidance for the Executive Order) to develop the next-generation Risk Management Framework (RMF 2.0) for systems, organizations and individuals. RMF 2.0 provides a disciplined, structured and repeatable process for organizations to select, implement, assess and continuously monitor security and privacy controls.

NIST Special Publication 800-37, Revision 2, empowers customers to take charge of their protection needs and provide security and privacy solutions to support organizational missions and business objectives. It includes a new organizational preparation step, instituted to achieve more timely, effective, efficient and cost-effective risk management processes. The organizational preparation step incorporates concepts from the Cybersecurity Framework to facilitate better communication between senior leaders and executives at the enterprise and mission/business process levels and system owners—conveying acceptable limits regarding the implementation of security and privacy controls within the established organizational risk tolerance. The enterprise-wide preparation also facilitates the identification of common controls and the development of organization-wide tailored security and privacy control baselines. This significantly reduces the workload on individual system owners, provides more customized security and privacy solutions, and lowers the overall cost of system development and protection.

And finally, RMF 2.0 helps organizations reduce the complexity of their IT infrastructure by consolidating, standardizing and optimizing systems, applications and services through the application of enterprise architecture concepts and models. Such complexity reduction is critical to identifying, prioritizing and focusing organizational resources on high-value assets that require increased levels of protection—taking steps commensurate with risk such as moving assets to cloud-based systems or shared services, systems and applications.

The transformation to consolidated security and privacy guidelines will help organizations strengthen their foundational security and privacy programs, achieve greater efficiencies in control implementation, promote greater collaboration of security and privacy professionals, and provide an appropriate level of security and privacy protection for systems and individuals.

About the author

Ron Ross is a computer scientist and Fellow at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. He specializes in cybersecurity, risk management, and systems security engineering. Ron is a retired Army officer who, when not defending cyberspace, follows his passion for NASCAR and takes care of his adopted rescue dog, Sophie.

Miles Walker poses smiling in front of the spiral staircase in the NIST library.

‌A Summer of Studying Cybersecurity — and Human Error’s Role in Attacks

NIST Research Is Setting the Standard to Help Buildings Withstand Tornadoes

A researcher wearing safety glasses reaches into a box of circuitry and other equipment, which emits a green glow.

Demystifying Quantum: It’s Here, There and Everywhere

Good afternoon Mr. Ross, I just want to let you know that I do admire your leadership at NIST with such an incredible publications like the SP-800's and others to keep our beautiful country safe. I did work before supporting and improving the ICD503 and your publications were read and exercise by me in order to do my job. I want to thank you for giving me opportunity to continue reading every day on your new development publications on Cyber Security and Information Assurance that are my passion. Have a wonderful day.

Best Regards Carlos G. Salinas

Thank you for your kind remarks, Mr. Salinas. They are very much appreciated. It is an honor and a privilege to be able to serve our public and private sector customers by providing standards, guidelines, and best practices to help them build robust security and privacy programs.

I only just now received the link to the draft SP 800-37. In my opinion, NIST did a great job on RMF already. Unfortunately, I am familiar with a segment of government that immediately assumes it must have its own variations of anything and everything. This "organization" made a mess of RMF from the start, seemingly only wanting to make it as painless as possible. They failed in that by the way. If I had to pick one overriding issue that I would change If I could, it would be the apparent universality of the term "organization" used in so many controls absent a consistent understanding of who or what part of a large organization is being addressed. When an assessment procedure tells me "organizations" are automatically compliant because <insertAgencyNameHere> has defined the <widget> for me, and this control part is not identified as a tier 1 or common offering, several veins of logic are now varicose. The very next control or part may speak of "organization" as if it is the CCP or the ISO without regard for what precedes or follows. My assumption is that many people worked on controls independently and never came to agreement on a standard definition of "organization."

Beautiful blog author.Thank you for sharing.Keep it up.Good wishes for your work.

Beautiful blog post author.Thank you.

Excellent post & thank you so much for sharing

Thank you for your post.

Add new comment

No HTML tags allowed.
Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

A man using a smartphone on a cobblestone street with illuminated office windows and a shop in the background.

Photo by Raghu Rai/Magnum

Privacy is power

Don’t just give away your privacy to the likes of google and facebook – protect it, or you disempower us all.

by Carissa Véliz + BIO

Imagine having a master key for your life. A key or password that gives access to the front door to your home, your bedroom, your diary, your computer, your phone, your car, your safe deposit, your health records. Would you go around making copies of that key and giving them out to strangers? Probably not the wisest idea – it would be only a matter of time before someone abused it, right? So why are you willing to give up your personal data to pretty much anyone who asks for it?

Privacy is the key that unlocks the aspects of yourself that are most intimate and personal, that make you most you, and most vulnerable. Your naked body. Your sexual history and fantasies. Your past, present and possible future diseases. Your fears, your losses, your failures. The worst thing you have ever done, said, and thought. Your inadequacies, your mistakes, your traumas. The moment in which you have felt most ashamed. That family relation you wish you didn’t have. Your most drunken night.

When you give that key, your privacy, to someone who loves you, it will allow you to enjoy closeness, and they will use it to benefit you. Part of what it means to be close to someone is sharing what makes you vulnerable, giving them the power to hurt you, and trusting that person never to take advantage of the privileged position granted by intimacy. People who love you might use your date of birth to organise a surprise birthday party for you; they’ll make a note of your tastes to find you the perfect gift; they’ll take into account your darkest fears to keep you safe from the things that scare you. Not everyone will use access to your personal life in your interest, however. Fraudsters might use your date of birth to impersonate you while they commit a crime; companies might use your tastes to lure you into a bad deal; enemies might use your darkest fears to threaten and extort you. People who don’t have your best interest at heart will exploit your data to further their own agenda. Privacy matters because the lack of it gives others power over you.

You might think you have nothing to hide, nothing to fear. You are wrong – unless you are an exhibitionist with masochistic desires of suffering identity theft, discrimination, joblessness, public humiliation and totalitarianism, among other misfortunes. You have plenty to hide, plenty to fear, and the fact that you don’t go around publishing your passwords or giving copies of your home keys to strangers attests to that.

You might think your privacy is safe because you are a nobody – nothing special, interesting or important to see here. Don’t shortchange yourself. If you weren’t that important, businesses and governments wouldn’t be going to so much trouble to spy on you.

You have your attention, your presence of mind – everyone is fighting for it. They want to know more about you so they can know how best to distract you, even if that means luring you away from quality time with your loved ones or basic human needs such as sleep. You have money, even if it is not a lot – companies want you to spend your money on them. Hackers are eager to get hold of sensitive information or images so they can blackmail you. Insurance companies want your money too, as long as you are not too much of a risk, and they need your data to assess that. You can probably work; businesses want to know everything about whom they are hiring – including whether you might be someone who will want to fight for your rights. You have a body – public and private institutions would love to know more about it, perhaps experiment with it, and learn more about other bodies like yours. You have an identity – criminals can use it to commit crimes in your name and let you pay for the bill. You have personal connections. You are a node in a network. You are someone’s offspring, someone’s neighbour, someone’s teacher or lawyer or barber. Through you, they can get to other people. That’s why apps ask you for access to your contacts. You have a voice – all sorts of agents would like to use you as their mouthpiece on social media and beyond. You have a vote – foreign and national forces want you to vote for the candidate that will defend their interests.

As you can see, you are a very important person. You are a source of power.

By now, most people are aware that their data is worth money. But your data is not valuable only because it can be sold. Facebook does not technically sell your data, for instance. Nor does Google. They sell the power to influence you. They sell the power to show you ads, and the power to predict your behaviour. Google and Facebook are not really in the business of data – they are in the business of power. Even more than monetary gain, personal data bestows power on those who collect and analyse it, and that is what makes it so coveted.

T here are two aspects to power. The first aspect is what the German philosopher Rainer Forst in 2014 defined as ‘the capacity of A to motivate B to think or do something that B would otherwise not have thought or done’. The means through which the powerful enact their influence are varied. They include motivational speeches, recommendations, ideological descriptions of the world, seduction and credible threats. Forst argues that brute force or violence is not an exercise of power, for subjected people don’t ‘do’ anything; rather, something is done to them. But clearly brute force is an instance of power. It is counterintuitive to think of someone as powerless who is subjecting us through violence. Think of an army dominating a population, or a thug strangling you. In Economy and Society (1978), the German political economist Max Weber describes this second aspect of power as the ability for people and institutions to ‘carry out [their] own will despite resistance’.

In short, then, powerful people and institutions make us act and think in ways in which we would not act and think were it not for their influence. If they fail to influence us into acting and thinking in the way that they want us to, powerful people and institutions can exercise force upon us – they can do unto us what we will not do ourselves.

There are different types of power: economic, political and so on. But power can be thought of as being like energy: it can take many different forms, and these can change. A wealthy company can often use its money to influence politics through lobbying, for instance, or to shape public opinion through paying for ads.

Power over others’ privacy is the quintessential kind of power in the digital age

That tech giants such as Facebook and Google are powerful is hardly news. But exploring the relationship between privacy and power can help us to better understand how institutions amass, wield and transform power in the digital age, which in turn can give us tools and ideas to resist the kind of domination that survives on violations of the right to privacy. However, to grasp how institutions accumulate and exercise power in the digital age, first we have to look at the relationship between power, knowledge and privacy.

There is a tight connection between knowledge and power. At the very least, knowledge is an instrument of power. The French philosopher Michel Foucault goes even further, and argues that knowledge in itself is a form of power . There is power in knowing. By protecting our privacy, we prevent others from being empowered with knowledge about us that can be used against our interests.

The more that someone knows about us, the more they can anticipate our every move, as well as influence us. One of the most important contributions of Foucault to our understanding of power is the insight that power does not only act upon human beings – it constructs human subjects (even so, we can still resist power and construct ourselves). Power generates certain mentalities, it transforms sensitivities, it brings about ways of being in the world. In that vein, the British political theorist Steven Lukes argues in his book Power (1974) that power can bring about a system that produces wants in people that work against their own interests. People’s desires can themselves be a result of power, and the more invisible the means of power, the more powerful they are. Examples of power shaping preferences today include when tech uses research about how dopamine works to make you addicted to an app, or when you are shown political ads based on personal information that makes a business think you are a particular kind of person (a ‘persuadable’, as the data-research company Cambridge Analytica put it, or someone who might be nudged into not voting, for instance).

The power that comes about as a result of knowing personal details about someone is a very particular kind of power. Like economic power and political power, privacy power is a distinct type of power, but it also allows those who hold it the possibility of transforming it into economic, political and other kinds of power. Power over others’ privacy is the quintessential kind of power in the digital age.

T wo years after it was funded and despite its popularity, Google still hadn’t developed a sustainable business model. In that sense, it was just another unprofitable internet startup. Then, in 2000, Google launched AdWords, thereby starting the data economy. Now called Google Ads, it exploited the data produced by Google’s interactions with its users to sell ads. In less than four years, the company achieved a 3,590 per cent increase in revenue.

That same year, the Federal Trade Commission had recommended to US Congress that online privacy be regulated. However, after the attacks of 11 September 2001 on the Twin Towers in New York, concern about security took precedence over privacy, and plans for regulation were dropped. The digital economy was able to take off and reach the magnitude it enjoys today because governments had an interest in having access to people’s data in order to control them. From the outset, digital surveillance has been sustained through a joint effort between private and public institutions.

The mass collection and analysis of personal data has empowered governments and prying companies. Governments now know more about their citizens than ever before. The Stasi (the security service of the German Democratic Republic), for instance, managed to have files only on about a third of the population, even if it aspired to have complete information on all citizens. Intelligence agencies today hold much more information on all of the population. To take just one important example, a significant proportion of people volunteer private information in social networks. As the US filmmaker Laura Poitras put it in an interview with The Washington Post in 2014: ‘Facebook is a gift to intelligence agencies.’ Among other possibilities, that kind of information gives governments the ability to anticipate protests, and even pre-emptively arrest people who plan to take part. Having the power to know about organised resistance before it happens, and being able to squash it in time, is a tyrant’s dream.

Tech companies’ power is constituted, on the one hand, by having exclusive control of data and, on the other, by the ability to anticipate our every move, which in turn gives them opportunities to influence our behaviour, and sell that influence to others. Companies that earn most of their revenues through advertising have used our data as a moat – a competitive advantage that has made it impossible for alternative businesses to challenge tech titans. Google’s search engine, for example, is as good as it is partly because its algorithm has much more data to learn from than any of its competitors. In addition to keeping the company safe from competitors and allowing it to train its algorithm better, our data also allows tech companies to predict and influence our behaviour. With the amount of data it has access to, Google can know what keeps you up at night, what you desire the most, what you are planning to do next. It then whispers this information to other busybodies who want to target you for ads.

Tech wants you to think that the innovations it brings into the market are inevitable

Companies might also share your data with ‘data brokers’ who will create a file on you based on everything they know about you (or, rather, everything they think they know), and then sell it to pretty much whoever is willing to buy it – insurers, governments, prospective employers, even fraudsters.

Data vultures are incredibly savvy at using both the aspects of power discussed above: they make us give up our data, more or less voluntarily, and they also snatch it away from us, even when we try to resist. Loyalty cards are an example of power making us do certain things that we would otherwise not do. When you are offered a discount for loyalty at your local supermarket, what you are being offered is for that company to conduct surveillance on you, and then influence your behaviour through nudges (discounts that will encourage you to buy certain products). An example of power doing things to us that we don’t want it to do is when Google records your location on your Android smartphone, even when you tell it not to.

Both types of power can also be seen at work at a more general level in the digital age. Tech constantly seduces us into doing things we would not otherwise do, from getting lost down a rabbit hole of videos on YouTube, to playing mindless games, or checking our phone hundreds of times a day. The digital age has brought about new ways of being in the world that don’t always make our lives better. Less visibly, the data economy has also succeeded in normalising certain ways of thinking. Tech companies want you to think that, if you have done nothing wrong, you have no reason to object to their holding your data. They also want you to think that treating your data as a commodity is necessary for digital tech, and that digital tech is progress – even when it might sometimes look worryingly similar to social or political regress. More importantly, tech wants you to think that the innovations it brings into the market are inevitable. That’s what progress looks like, and progress cannot be stopped.

That narrative is complacent and misleading. As the Danish economic geographer Bent Flyvbjerg points out in Rationality and Power (1998), power produces the knowledge, narratives and rationality that are conducive to building the reality it wants. But technology that perpetuates sexist and racist trends and worsens inequality is not progress. Inventions are far from unavoidable. Treating data as a commodity is a way for companies to earn money, and has nothing to do with building good products. Hoarding data is a way of accumulating power. Instead of focusing only on their bottom line, tech companies can and should do better to design the online world in a way that contributes to people’s wellbeing. And we have many reasons to object to institutions collecting and using our data in the way that they do.

Among those reasons is institutions not respecting our autonomy, our right to self-govern. Here is where the harder side of power plays a role. The digital age thus far has been characterised by institutions doing whatever they want with our data, unscrupulously bypassing our consent whenever they think they can get away with it. In the offline world, that kind of behaviour would be called matter-of-factly ‘theft’ or ‘coercion’. That it is not called this in the online world is yet another testament to tech’s power over narratives.

I t’s not all bad news, though. Yes, institutions in the digital age have hoarded privacy power, but we can reclaim the data that sustains it, and we can limit their collecting new data. Foucault argued that, even if power constructs human subjects, we have the possibility to resist power and construct ourselves. The power of big tech looks and feels very solid. But tech’s house of cards is partly built on lies and theft. The data economy can be disrupted. The tech powers that be are nothing without our data. A small piece of regulation, a bit of resistance from citizens, a few businesses starting to offer privacy as a competitive advantage, and it can all evaporate.

No one is more conscious of their vulnerability than tech companies themselves. That is why they are trying to convince us that they do care about privacy after all (despite what their lawyers say in court). That is why they spend millions of dollars on lobbying. If they were so certain about the value of their products for the good of users and society, they would not need to lobby so hard. Tech companies have abused their power, and it is time to resist them.

In the digital age, resistance inspired by the abuse of power has been dubbed a techlash. Abuses of power remind us that power needs to be curtailed for it to be a positive influence in society. Even if you happen to be a tech enthusiast, even if you think that there is nothing wrong with what tech companies and governments are doing with our data, you should still want power to be limited, because you never know who will be in power next. Your new prime minister might be more authoritarian than the old one; the next CEO of the next big tech company might not be as benevolent as those we’ve seen thus far. Tech companies have helped totalitarian regimes in the past, and there is no clear distinction between government and corporate surveillance. Businesses share data with governments, and public institutions share data with companies.

When you expose your privacy, you put us all at risk

Do not give in to the data economy without at least some resistance. Refraining from using tech altogether is unrealistic for most people, but there is much more you can do short of that. Respect other people’s privacy. Don’t expose ordinary citizens online. Don’t film or photograph people without their consent, and certainly don’t share such images online. Try to limit the data you surrender to institutions that don’t have a claim to it. Imagine someone asks for your number in a bar and won’t take a ‘No, thank you’ for an answer. If that person were to continue to harass you for your number, what would you do? Perhaps you would be tempted to give them a fake number. That is the essence of obfuscation, as outlined by the media scholars Finn Bruton and Helen Nissenbaum in the 2015 book of that name. If a clothing company asks for your name to sell you clothes, give them a different name – say, Dr Private Information, so that they get the message. Don’t give these institutions evidence they can use to claim that we are consenting to our data being taken away from us. Make it clear that your consent is not being given freely.

When downloading apps and buying products, choose products that are better for privacy. Use privacy extensions on your browsers. Turn your phone’s wi-fi, Bluetooth and locations services off when you don’t need them. Use the legal tools at your disposal to ask companies for the data they have on you, and ask them to delete that data. Change your settings to protect your privacy. Refrain from using one of those DNA home testing kits – they are not worth it. Forget about ‘smart’ doorbells that violate your privacy and that of others. Write to your representatives sharing your concerns about privacy. Tweet about it. Take opportunities as they come along to inform business, governments and other people that you care about privacy, that what they are doing is not okay.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking you are safe from privacy harms, maybe because you are young, male, white, heterosexual and healthy. You might think that your data can work only for you, and never against you, if you’ve been lucky so far. But you might not be as healthy as you think you are, and you will not be young forever. The democracy you are taking for granted might morph into an authoritarian regime that might not favour the likes of you.

Furthermore, privacy is not only about you. Privacy is both personal and collective. When you expose your privacy, you put us all at risk. Privacy power is necessary for democracy – for people to vote according to their beliefs and without undue pressure, for citizens to protest anonymously without fear of repercussions, for individuals to have freedom to associate, speak their minds, read what they are curious about. If we are going to live in a democracy, the bulk of power needs to be with the people. If most of the power lies with companies, we will have a plutocracy. If most of the power lies with the state, we will have some kind of authoritarianism. Democracy is not a given. It is something we have to fight for every day. And if we stop building the conditions in which it thrives, democracy will be no more. Privacy is important because it gives power to the people. Protect it.

Photo of a person wearing large sunglasses with outdoor scenery reflected, resting their fingers on their chin in a thoughtful pose.

Main character syndrome

Why romanticising your own life is philosophically dubious, setting up toxic narratives and an inability to truly love

Anna Gotlib

Photo of people in a forest, some kneeling and examining plants, others standing and walking, all surrounded by lush greenery.

Food and drink

The joy of foraging

Offering an escape from industrial foods, foraging nourishes the soul and body, but it needs democratic access to the land

A woman in casual attire walking by a large weaving loom with black threads in a bright, clean room

Design and fashion

When luxury is good

The waste and exploitation of fast fashion shouldn’t blind us to the joys of making beautiful clothing with care

Roger Tredre

Painting of a woman with a sword defending a fort from attackers; other figures fight with swords and wooden poles and carry stones.

Race and ethnicity

The forging of countries

Two distinct and conflicting forms of nationalism – civic and ethnic – helped create the nation-states of Europe

Luka Ivan Jukić

Photo of an ancient male statue with a cloth draped over his shoulder and arm, three people are sitting on a bench to the side of the statue

Thinkers and theories

The value of our values

When Nietzsche used the tools of philology to explore the nature of morality, he became a ‘philosopher of the future’

Alexander Prescott-Couch

Photo of a doll with curly red hair, blue eyes, and a large maroon hat, wearing a double string of pearls and a red dress.

Rituals and celebrations

Tender, yet creepy

Dolls help children create wonderfully vivid and imaginative worlds, while also serving as unsettling reminders of the abyss

Tishani Doshi

Essay on Data Privacy

Students are often asked to write an essay on Data Privacy in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Data Privacy

What is data privacy.

Data privacy is about keeping your personal information safe. It’s like a secret that you don’t want others to know. When you use the internet, you often share your details like your name, address, or credit card number. Companies collect this information to give you better services. But, if they don’t protect it well, bad people can steal it.

Why is Data Privacy Important?

Data privacy is very important because it protects you from harm. If bad people get your personal information, they can use it to steal your money or your identity. They can also use it to harm you in other ways. So, it’s important to keep your data safe.

How to Protect Your Data?

Protecting your data is not hard. You can do things like creating strong passwords, not sharing your personal details online, and only using secure websites. You should also be careful about what you post on social media. Remember, once you share something online, it’s hard to take it back.

Role of Companies in Data Privacy

Companies play a big role in data privacy. They collect your details and should keep them safe. They should tell you what they do with your data and ask for your permission. If they don’t, it’s not right. You should be careful about sharing your details with such companies.

250 Words Essay on Data Privacy

Data privacy is about keeping your personal information safe. It’s like keeping a secret that only you should know. In the digital world, this secret can be your name, address, phone number, or even things you like and dislike.

Imagine if your secret got out and people you don’t know started using it. It would feel bad, wouldn’t it? That’s why data privacy is important. It stops people from using your information in ways you don’t want.

How is Data Privacy Protected?

There are rules called ‘laws’ that tell companies how they can use your information. These laws are like a big fence that keeps your data safe. Companies must ask for your permission before they can use your data.

What Can We Do to Protect Our Data Privacy?

We can do a lot to protect our data. We can use strong passwords, not share too much information online, and always check if a website is safe before using it. We should also read and understand the privacy policies of websites and apps we use.

Data privacy is very important in our digital world. It’s about keeping our personal information safe from people who might misuse it. We can help protect our data privacy by being careful about what we share online and using safe and secure websites and apps.

500 Words Essay on Data Privacy

Introduction to data privacy, what is personal data.

Personal data is any information that can be used to identify you. This could be your name, address, phone number, or even the school you go to. When you use the internet, you often give out this information without even realizing it. For example, when you sign up for a new game or social media site, you often have to give them your email address or other personal details.

Imagine if someone you didn’t know could find out where you live, what school you go to, or even what your favorite food is, just by looking at the information you’ve shared online. This could be very scary and dangerous. That’s why data privacy is so important. It helps to keep your personal information safe, so you can use the internet without having to worry about people finding out things about you that you don’t want them to know.

Another way to protect your data privacy is by being careful about what information you share online. Before you give out your personal information, think about who will have access to it and what they might do with it. If you’re not sure, it’s always best to keep your information to yourself.

Data privacy is a very important part of using the internet safely. By understanding what personal data is and how to protect it, you can make sure your personal information stays safe. Remember, your personal data is like your secret treasure, and it’s up to you to keep it safe!

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Essay on Importance of Internet: Samples for Students

Updated on
Jun 20, 2024

Internet is not just a need or luxury, it has become a household necessity. It was used as a source of entertainment but now it is impossible to work in offices or study without the Internet. When the global pandemic locked everyone in their house, it became an important medium to connect, study and work. Students were able to study without the risk of catching COVID-19 because of the Internet. The importance of the internet is also a common topic in various entrance exams such as SAT , TOEFL , and UPSC . In this blog, you will learn how to write an essay on the importance of the Internet.

This Blog Includes:

Tips to write the perfect essay on internet, sample 1 of essay on the importance of the internet (100 words), sample essay 2 – importance of the internet (150 words), sample essay 3 on use of internet for student (300 words).

Nikita Puri

Nikita is a creative writer and editor, who is always ready to learn new skills. She has great knowledge about study abroad universities, researching and writing blogs about them. Being a perfectionist, she has a habit of keeping her tasks complete on time before the OCD hits her. When Nikita is not busy working, you can find her eating while binge-watching The office. Also, she breathes music. She has done her bachelor's from Delhi University and her master's from Jamia Millia Islamia.

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2025

September 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy

How it works

1 Digital Evolution: The Internet’s Global Reach, Power, and Potential Risks
2 Online Vulnerabilities: The Thin Line Between Connectivity and Privacy Breaches
3 Internet Deception: The Dark Side of Digital Identities
4 Internet Safety: Navigating the Web with Caution and Awareness
5 Government Oversight and the Vulnerability of the Digital Generation
6 References:

Digital Evolution: The Internet’s Global Reach, Power, and Potential Risks

The Internet has been around for about 20-plus years. In its time, it has evolved into this enormous commodity that everyone now uses. The Internet has given us many different things with just a click of a button. Without the Internet, we wouldn’t have T.V.s, cell phones, and other numerous accommodations it provides. If the Internet did not exist, we would have to do everything how we used to before we had the Internet.

We would actually have to put work into doing just a simple task. Without the Internet, a paper that would normally take a day to write could possibly take longer due to having to research everything. While doing research, Mr. Jeff Hancock, a professor at Stanford University, found out that losing internet access for a few days just made people fall behind on their work. “People carried out all the same activities they would have done had the internet been up, but they just did it two or three days later,” Borg says. “The economy is set up to deal with what essentially amounts to a holiday weekend.” This is an absolutely great thing for any and all business. It’s great for advertising, ordering products, and so much more.

An interesting article I read stated, “In 1995, fewer than 1% of the world’s population was online. The Internet was a curiosity, used mostly by people in the West. Fast-forward 20 years, and today more than 3.5bn people have an internet connection – nearly half of all humans on the planet – and the number is growing at a rate of around ten people a second. The world is connected through the Internet. In the same article, it also states that there have been other cities that have “turned off” their country’s Internet for obvious reasons. The article goes on to say, “Some governments also have “kill switches” that can effectively turn off the Internet in their country. Egypt did this during the Arab Spring uprising in 2011 to make it more difficult for protesters to coordinate their activity. Turkey and Iran have also shut off internet connectivity during protests. China is rumored to have a kill switch of its own. And American senators have proposed creating one in the U.S. as a means to defend the country from cyber attack.” I personally think it is a good idea to have a kill switch in the United States, especially with today’s current events. We need to be aware of the dangerous aspects of the Internet. Sometimes the most powerful objects can be the most treacherous.

Online Vulnerabilities: The Thin Line Between Connectivity and Privacy Breaches

Although the Internet has merged our continents together, there are also some alarming facts about the Internet. How much privacy do you really have on the Internet? Well, for starters, anyone can go and google any name. You’ll be surprised what things will pop up. For example, when I googled my full name, my Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter all came up. I was immediately concerned. If I were to get hired at a job, they could easily see my profile and go through my personal life. If there was something I didn’t want them to see, then there could be no escaping because it was public. I am constantly sharing my photos and locations with more than 100 people, and I never thought anything of it until now. Many people take their privacy for granted until it is taken away. Many have fallen ill to cyber problems on social media, which ranges from a simple cyber hack to a total catfish problem. An article I read stated, “Internet security specialists around the web have been constantly warning users of the increasing number of social engineering scams on social media. And the year 2011 is one of reference in terms of the number of attacks, variants of the same threat, and sophistication of social engineering targeting Facebook. And all these come on top of Facebook’s controversial privacy issues.”

Internet Deception: The Dark Side of Digital Identities

Currently, there is a popular T.V. show named Catfish that seeks people who are taking over someone’s identity online. Most of the time, these people will pretend to be someone else to receive things or for revenge. They often get emotionally hurt or, even worse, physically harming that other person. At times there would be the occasional “I fell in love with you, but you wouldn’t like me” excuse. There are many people who find it easy to simply steal photos of people and pretend to be someone else. While looking up stories about using fake accounts, I came across this story about an individual who catfished her own friend.

“I got this message one day from a boy who I went to school with, and he was like, ‘There’s a chick down here on Tinder and Instagram that is using your photos, and a few of my footy mates said they’ve been tuning her.’ I tried to search for her, but I was blocked, and so were my two best friends and my family, so I had to get a person from work to look her up. Anyway — ended up getting a heap of people to report her, so then I thought she was gone. Then, randomly about a month or so after, this guy messages me on Facebook saying, ‘I am sorry for the random add, but someone has been using your pictures — and we’ve been having a relationship over it.’ I was like, ‘What?!’

Internet Safety: Navigating the Web with Caution and Awareness

He was convinced that he wasn’t being catfished because they would talk on the phone, and she would send him several photos a day. But his friends kept telling him that he was. He told me he tried to meet up with her so many times, but last minute she would always bail. One excuse she had was that her boss was really sick and she was going to take him flowers. She then sent a picture of me holding flowers that I had uploaded MONTHS ago and later deleted. Eventually, he got frustrated with the lack of meeting up and cut it off. She then just disappeared one day. I know she is still catfishing, though, because, to this day, I’ve had two other guys tell me they were involved in an online relationship with her via Facebook chat and Instagram Direct. Crazy!” This is a perfect example of how many people take their privacy online for granted. There are many people in the world that are consistently taking other people’s lives and saying it is theirs.

There are many ways we can stay safe from the Internet. For starters, be aware of cyber security for all your electronics. You should then be aware of what is going on around the world. Families are always online, looking at current events or things that are happening, in general, to keep updated. Many people have received emails from numerous junk emails. Sometimes a lot of hacking is done through those types of emails. You automatically open your email, and you are instantly hacked. Another article I read explained other ways people can stay protected while being on the Internet; “Keep your computer’s operating system, browser, and security software up to date. Turn on automatic updates for these wherever possible. Be especially wary and vigilant if an offer demands you act immediately, sounds too good to be true, or asks for personal information. Updating privacy settings on websites and services (particularly on social media and search sites such as Facebook, Google, and Yahoo) is a good place to start protecting yourself. This can usually be done under a “settings” menu option. Since most sites default to information being shared publicly, changing settings will help you make sure your personal information is seen by fewer people. Ideally, you should choose to share information only with people you know.”

Government Oversight and the Vulnerability of the Digital Generation

A recent article it was talking about how the government and the Internet are somewhat working together. Microsoft had a recent court hearing for a gag order that gave the right to the government to look without consent. Although this is already a touchy subject, I feel that the government should have some rights. But, at the same time, how is it okay for them to invade our personal privacy like this? Microsoft wants to limit the control the government has on the Internet, as do many other online companies. In the article, it stated, “The Justice Department will limit its use of secrecy orders that prevent internet providers from telling people when the government has obtained a warrant to read their email during an investigation, according to a department memo issued last week.” This is a resolvent to the issue, but is this an order that will stand its ground for years to come? We, as internet users, need to be aware of sharing too much information. We often don’t think people pay much attention to us, but in reality, there is always someone waiting to find someone vulnerable and gullible.

The younger generation is the most vulnerable of all generations. Younger and younger kids are being given cell phones and other electronics that have access to many different types of applications. When buying these applications, a lot of sensitive information is given online to purchase them. A Lot of the time, parents don’t realize that giving these young children such freedom can actually be hurting them not just physically but also socially. Many people have seen or even experienced this type of hurt over the Internet.

References:

“2011: Facebook vs. Internet Security.” BullGuard,www.bullguard.com/bullguard-security-center/internet-security/social-media-d waves of anger/2011-facebook-vs-security.
Nuwer, Rachel. “Future – What if the internet stopped working for a day?” BBC, BBC, 7 Feb. 2017, www.bbc.com/future/story/20170207-what-if-the-internet-stopped-for-a-day.
Parker, Lara. “17 Of The Most Insane Catfish Stories That Will Make You Cringe.” BuzzFeed, www.buzzfeed.com/laraparker/insane-catfish-stories-that-will-make-you-want-to-delete?u tm_term=.fkAd5pD0D#.qylakJ686.
Slain, Morgan. “7 ways to protect your privacy on the internet.” The Next Web, 18 Aug. 2015, thenextweb.com/insider/2015/08/18/7-ways-to-protect-your-privacy-on-the-internet/.
Wingfield, Nick. “U.S. to Limit Use of Secrecy Orders That Microsoft Challenged.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Oct. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/business/microsoft-justice-department-secrecy.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FPrivacy&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=str eam&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=collection.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/business/microsoft-justice-department-secrecy.ht ml?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FPrivacy&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=collection
https://www.bullguard.com/bullguard-security-center/internet-security/social-media-dangers/2011-facebook-vs-security
https://www.buzzfeed.com/laraparker/insane-catfish-stories-that-will-make-you-want-to-delete?utm_term=.fkAd5pD0D#.qylakJ686
https://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/08/18/7-ways-to-protect-your-privacy-on-the-internet/

Cite this page

The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy. (2023, Aug 07). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-internet-benefits-risks-and-online-privacy/

"The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy." PapersOwl.com , 7 Aug 2023, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-internet-benefits-risks-and-online-privacy/

PapersOwl.com. (2023). The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-internet-benefits-risks-and-online-privacy/ [Accessed: 29 Sep. 2024]

"The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy." PapersOwl.com, Aug 07, 2023. Accessed September 29, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-internet-benefits-risks-and-online-privacy/

"The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy," PapersOwl.com , 07-Aug-2023. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-internet-benefits-risks-and-online-privacy/. [Accessed: 29-Sep-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Privacy in the Digital Age Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Anonymity and the internet, anonymous servers, anonymous users, advantages and disadvantages of anonymity, controversies and responses.

Bibliography

Social, economic, and technological advances have dramatically increased the amount of information any individual can access or possess. Unfortunately, this has also brought about various challenges that must be addressed. Generally, information is a vital treasure in itself, and the more one has the better. Having valuable, intellectual, economic, and social information creates enormous opportunities and advantages for any individual.

Even though information is a treasure, it can also be a liability. Besides constantly seeking ways to acquire, keep, and dispose of it, users of information also want to make sure that what is seen and heard privately does not become public without their consent. In the present technologically advanced society, a number of factors have contributed to the high demand for information and hence the need for anonymity, security, and privacy.

Increased public awareness of the potential abuse of digital communication, especially the Internet is one major concern for all stakeholders. To a large extent, most Internet users are concerned about privacy and do not want all the information they send or receive over the Internet to be connected to them by name.

This paper presents arguments indicating that it is critical for governments to impose restrictions on Internet privacy. According to Kizza anonymity refers to the state of being nameless or having no identity.

Since it is extremely difficult for anybody to live a meaningful life while being totally anonymous, there are different types of anonymity that exist including pseudo anonymity and untraceable identity.

Pseudo anonymity is where one chooses to be identified by a certain pseudonym or code while untraceable identity implies that one is not known by any name.

For many people, anonymity is one of the biggest worries as far as using the Internet is concerned. The virtual world may make it easier for dissidents to criticize governments, for alcoholics to talk about their problems and for shy people to find love. However, anonymity also creates room for dishonest people to pose as children in chat rooms and criminals in order to hide from law enforcers.

As such, Internet anonymity seems to cut both ways. According to proponents, preserving anonymity on the Internet may be the cornerstone of safeguarding privacy and a vital part of the constitutionally protected right to free speech. Critics have, however, argued that online anonymity permits people to affect others and not be held responsible or accountable for their actions.

In general, the use of the Internet has created room for individuals to operate in secret, without anyone being able to tell who they are. In particular, the Internet provides two channels through which anonymous acts can be carried out. These are anonymous servers and anonymous users.

With advances in software and hardware, anonymity on the Internet has grown through anonymous servers. These may be full anonymity servers or pseudonymous servers. When full anonymity servers are used, it is impossible to identify the packet headers.

In the case of pseudonymous servers, pseudonyms are usually placed inside packet headers to conceal identity. In the process, the actual identity gets hidden behind a pseudonym and any packets received thereafter are relayed to the real server. Anonymity servers are able to accomplish this through the use of encryption.

Other options are also used to allow users to adopt false names to hide their identity as they use the Internet. With false names, they can proceed to use message boards or participate in chat rooms without being recognized by anyone.

This has sometimes led to sensitive or highly personal information being posted to user groups, news groups, and chat rooms. In addition, popular protocols are also used to provide anonymity to the users. Generally, these protocols accept messages relayed to servers with arbitrary field information.

To some extent, anonymity may be used to curb bad behavior and to warn culprits that they are being watched. This contributes greatly to ensuring that everyone in the organization behaves appropriately. Although whistle blowers are sometimes controversial, they are reliable in a number of occasions such as when there is abuse of office and resources. Secondly, anonymity can be useful to those in charge of national security.

It may be used by underground spies to gather useful information for national defense. Where there is intimidation and fear of punishment, anonymity may be used to reveal useful information. Anonymity is also good for strengthening relationships and the security of some people.

One of the disadvantages has to do with the fact that anonymity can make it easy for criminals and fraudsters to commit crimes. It can also make it difficult to access information that may be useful for settling disputes.

Anonymity, according to its defenders, is a right protected by the American Constitution. In a notable 1995 case concerned with the distribution of anonymous pamphlets, the Supreme Court noted that anonymity is some form of a shield for individuals. Enshrined in law or not, the power to remain anonymous is often taken for granted by members of democratic societies.

Many authors have written controversial works using pseudonyms, politicians comment confidentially using generic titles like a spokesperson, and one of the first principles of journalism is never to divulge the identity of an anonymous source. It is important to note that anonymity is central to free speech and free speech is central to democracy.

According to Lambert, anonymity can be a weapon that damages or destroys reputations. Defenders of anonymity are always concerned that the idea of anonymity on the Internet is regarded differently from any other kind of anonymity.

If the Supreme Court recognizes that anonymous books and leaflets are a justified form of free speech, the argument goes that Internet communication should be treated the same. Where anonymity is concerned, radio and television are treated differently from books because they are broadcast media.

They are not disseminated the same way and are harder to ignore. Although critics charge that Internet anonymity should be subject to special regulation, one of the basic premises of devising laws for the Internet is that they should be technologically neutral.

According to law enforcers, the Internet’s built-in anonymity makes it a safe haven not just for whistle-blowers and dissidents but also for criminals and terrorists. In November 2002, newspapers reported that the Pentagon had briefly considered and rejected an idea called e-DNA, which would have tagged natural Internet traffic with personalized makers.

Since human DNA is unique to every individual, DNA samples taken from crime scenes can often be used to trap criminals. In much the same way, the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) hoped that Internet traffic tagged with e-DNA makers would be traceable to individuals and their computers. Had the plan not been scuttled, it would have outlawed most forms of Internet anonymity.

However, if anonymity is a cornerstone for democracy, as proponents allege, it would seem to be worth going to some lengths to defend. Apparently, this would require more than passing laws to protect Internet users who want to remain anonymous.

Ultimately, the recognition of the different kinds of anonymity might be necessary, followed by the treatment of the various forms of anonymity in different ways, including legal protection for uses of anonymity that are not connected to criminal behavior.

It may also be necessary to come up with ways to distinguish between those hiding behind their anonymity to commit crimes and those using it for whistle-blowing purposes. The distinction will help organizations to determine if it is necessary to allow anonymity in a given situation.

Strangely enough, anonymity may be complicated or simplified through the Internet given that communication via the Internet happens secretly and determining a user’s identity can not be done with absolute certainty.

As has been discussed in this paper, anonymity has its good and bad side. If left unchecked, innocent individuals in the society will be subjected to undeserved suffering. In a number of cases, therefore, it is necessary either for a local authority or national legislatures to pass laws that regulate when and who can use anonymity legally.

In the current environment of the Internet, there are serious debates on the freedoms of individuals on the Internet and how these freedoms can be protected when dealing with people on the Internet under the cover of anonymity.

Kizza, Joseph. Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age . Chattanooga, TN: Springer, 2010.

Lambert, Laura. The Internet: Biographies . Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2005.

Schwabach, Aaron. Internet and the Law: Technology, Society, and Compromises. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2006.

Gun politics in the United States
The Origin of the Human Rights Concept
Whistle-Blowing and Leadership
Aspects of Social Behavior and Privacy
Bullying Through Social Media
Demonstrations and Protests
What Are Human Rights?
Media Ethics and Law – Free Expression
Immigrants and Human Rights
The Challenge of Human Rights and Cultural Diversity
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, April 19). Privacy in the Digital Age. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/

"Privacy in the Digital Age." IvyPanda , 19 Apr. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Privacy in the Digital Age'. 19 April.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Privacy in the Digital Age." April 19, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "Privacy in the Digital Age." April 19, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

IvyPanda . "Privacy in the Digital Age." April 19, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

Basic site functions
Ensuring secure, safe transactions
Secure account login
Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
Remembering privacy and security settings
Analyzing site traffic and usage
Personalized search, content, and recommendations
Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

Remembering general and regional preferences
Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

IEEE Xplore Digital Library
IEEE Standards
IEEE Spectrum

Publications
Additional Digital Privacy Resources

What Is Digital Privacy and Its Importance?

Digital privacy, a subset of the broader concept of privacy, focuses on the proper handling and usage of sensitive data—specifically personal information, communication, and conduct—that are generated and transmitted within digital environments. In essence, it denotes the rights and expectations of individuals to keep personal information confidential and secure in the digital realm.

The importance of digital privacy is profoundly evident in today's data-driven world. Individuals utilize digital platforms for various tasks, generating substantial amounts of personal data that could convey intimate insights about their lives if misused—whether it's sensitive financial information or personal health records. Therefore, digital privacy is crucial as it maintains a boundary to protect users from unwanted intrusions and manipulations of data, preserving human dignity and individual autonomy.

Equally deserving of attention is the role of digital privacy in ensuring a healthy democratic society. It allows the freedom of thought and expressio n , promoting diversity of ideas and opinions while negating manipulative influences. Within the business sphere, digital privacy practices foster customer trust and build corporate reputation, which are indispensable elements for growth and success in a competitive marketplace.

Finally, digital privacy is pivotal in circumventing potential data breaches. With cybercriminal activities on the rise, ensuring an individual's digital privacy is not just desirable, but a vital necessity. The threats posed by malicious hackers and cybercriminals make the protection of personal data of utmost importance, thereby emphasizing the imperative need for digital privacy.

Introduction to Digital Privacy

Digital privacy in the modern era is a complex amalgamation of various elements, including data privacy and individual privacy . It entails protecting personal information that a user shares with other entities—be it other individuals, companies, or public bodies—across digital platforms. It encompasses safeguarding one's digital identity, ensuring confidentiality and security of communications and transactions, and maintaining control over user-generated data.

The advent of the digital age has revolutionized our understanding and expectations of privacy. Initially viewed primarily in terms of rights to solitude, privacy has now evolved to emphasize control over personal data. Digital privacy in this context symbolizes the ability of users to own, manage, and control their data, with a focus on how these data are collected, processed, stored, and shared.

Key components of digital privacy can be broadly categorized into three main areas—individual privacy, information privacy, and communication privacy. Individual privacy centers on the protection of personal information identifiable to an individual such as health records, financial information, or social security numbers. Information privacy involves safeguarding of data collected digitally, ensuring it is collected and processed ethically and lawfully. Communication privacy pertains to the confidentiality and security of digital communications, preventing unauthorized access and interception.

Digital privacy holds significant implications for both individuals and businesses. On an individual scale, digital privacy safeguards personal information from theft, abuse, and unwanted exposure, thereby maintaining personal security and mitigating risks associated with identity theft and online harassment. In contrast, businesses dealing with customer data need to uphold rigorous data privacy standards to keep consumer trust intact and avoid legal repercussions arising from data breaches.

Learn more in our course program: Protecting Privacy in the Digital Age

Access the courses

Importance of Digital Privacy for Individuals

Digital privacy serves as a shield that safeguards personal information from undue exposure and misuse. Consider the myriad of information individuals provide online—from social media profiles to online banking transactions. Without stringent digital privacy controls, these data could be exploited, resulting in severe consequences such as financial loss, identity theft, and personal harm. Hence, the role of digital privacy in protecting users against these risks cannot be understated.

Neglecting digital privacy could expose individuals to a plethora of risks. These include phishing scams, ransomware attacks, and cyberstalking—all of which could lead to significant personal, financial, and psychological harm. At an even graver scale, the lack of digital privacy could facilitate large-scale data breaches, where sensitive personal data of millions could be hijacked, then sold, or exploited.

Thankfully, individuals can take several steps to actively protect their digital privacy. For starters, using strong, unique passwords and activating 2-step verification where possible, can put up the first line of defense. Additionally, one should be cautious about the information shared online and ensure that privacy settings on social platforms are adjusted to limit data exposure. Regular software and firmware updates are also crucial as they often include security patches that fix vulnerabilities which cybercriminals might exploit. Lastly, the use of secure networks and reliable cybersecurity software can significantly contribute to increased digital privacy.

Social media platforms can both advance and undermine internet privacy . On the one hand, they can promote digital privacy by providing privacy controls that limit who can view user profiles and posts. On the other, they can also hinder privacy through vast data collection practices and data sharing with advertisers and third parties.

Encryption plays a pivotal role in strengthening digital privacy. It involves encoding information such that only authorized parties can access it. By leveraging encryption technologies, users can ensure that even if their data is intercepted, it remains unreadable and thus, safe. Encryption is extensively used in protecting sensitive data transmission and storage, including in email services, messaging apps, and cloud storage, thereby enhancing individual digital privacy.

Cybersecurity and Digital Privacy

Cybersecurity and digital privacy, while distinct, are inextricably linked aspects of the digital landscape. Cybersecurity primarily focuses on protecting the integrity and confidentiality of data and systems from cyber threats such as malware and hacking. Digital privacy, on the other hand, is about safeguarding personal information from unlawful data collection and ensuring user control over personal data. In essence, cybersecurity represents the measures taken to secure data and systems, while digital privacy deals with how personal information is collected, used, and shared. Therefore, effective cybersecurity is crucial for ensuring digital privacy.

Cybersecurity threats that impede digital privacy are abundant and perpetually evolving. These include viruses, ransomware, and phishing attacks, which could expose sensitive personal data. More sophisticated threats like man-in-the-middle attacks and Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks could disrupt systems and services, potentially leading to data breaches.

Businesses typically adopt a layered approach to bolster their cybersecurity posture and enhance digital privacy. This involves the deployment of numerous security measures at various levels, such as firewalls, Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), antivirus software, and secure authentication systems. Additionally, cybersecurity awareness training for employees and adopting best practices such as least privilege principle and regular systems audits can help contravene privacy-eroding cyber threats.

The absence of cybersecurity measures portends grave repercussions for digital privacy. Unprotected digital systems offer a favorable atmosphere for cybercriminals to launch attacks, leading to unauthorized access to sensitive information. Even worse, the lack of sufficient cybersecurity measures could facilitate large-scale data breaches, with the potential to significantly compromise the privacy of individuals at mass-scale.

Government Surveillance and Digital Privacy

The nexus between government surveillance and digital privacy is a complex and often contentious issue. While surveillance can be justified on grounds of maintaining national security or preserving public safety, it invariably poses challenges to digital privacy. From indiscriminate metadata collection to CCTV monitoring and data requests from tech companies, government surveillance strategies can lead to substantial encroachments on citizens’ digital privacy.

The ethics of government surveillance in the digital space often centers around the balancing act between maintaining national security and preserving individual privacy. Unquestionably, state authorities have a duty to secure the nation from threats, both internal and external. However, the presence of broad and pervasive surveillance measures could stifle individual liberties, not least the right to privacy. Hence, the crux of the ethical debate lies in finding legitimate, proportionate, and justifiable surveillance methods that respect individuals' privacy rights.

Striking a balance between privacy concerns and national security needs is indeed complex. On the one hand, citizens expect their governments to ensure their safety. Conversely, they also wish to keep personal aspects of their lives confidential. Privacy-enhancing technologies like encryption, anonymizing tools, and secure communication channels can help individuals protect their digital privacy. It is also essential for democratic discussion about the appropriate extent of surveillance, leading to legal protective mechanisms that respect both national security needs and privacy concerns.

Several legal frameworks exist worldwide to regulate government access to digital data. These include data protection laws like the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), sector-specific regulations such as Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the U.S. for health information, and surveillance laws that stipulate under which conditions governments can access personal data . While these frameworks provide a degree of protection for individuals' digital privacy, challenges remain, such as jurisdictional discrepancies in these laws and the capabilities of governments to bypass legal constraints.

Emerging Technologies and Digital Privacy

Emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI) significantly impact digital privacy. AI's capabilities for data processing and analysis can enable more efficient service delivery and insights generation. However, these same capabilities can also be used to analyze personal data for profiling and decision-making without meaningful human oversight, potentially invading individual privacy without consent. As such, AI can be both a force for good and a potential detriment to digital privacy, calling for robust privacy policies to govern its use.

Data analytics, another powerful development, can shape digital privacy practices by providing insights into users' behaviors, enabling better personalization of services. However, extensive data harvesting and analysis can easily infringe individual privacy rights if not carefully managed. Thus, data minimization and anonymization techniques need to be integrated alongside data analytics to balance efficiency gains against privacy implications.

In the face of the evolving combination of digital privacy and technology, individuals can adapt by staying abreast of technological changes and their implications for privacy. This involves understanding the privacy policies of digital services, making use of privacy tools and settings, and regularly updating and patching systems to address any technical vulnerabilities.

The integration of the Internet of Things (IoT) devices into daily life presents serious digital privacy risks. IoT devices collect, process, and transmit vast amounts of data, some of it highly personal, posing potential privacy threats if this data is misused or inadequately protected. Thus, users need to pay careful attention to the security settings and data handling practices of such devices.

Finally, advancements like facial recognition technologies pose significant challenges to digital privacy norms. While offering transformative potential for security and access control, they bring up unsettling questions: Will individuals lose anonymity in public spaces? How can misuse for surveillance be prevented? This accentuates the necessity of legal and ethical guidelines to govern the use of such powerful tools in an era heightened by privacy concerns.

Digital privacy, undeniably an indispensable aspect of personal online identities, has significant individual and societal implications. From data protection laws to cybersecurity measures, various elements influence digital privacy. As human evolution continues in the digital era, grappling with the rapid progression of technologies like AI and IoT, their understanding and management of digital privacy will inevitably require continual reassessment and adaptation. Individuals, businesses, and governments share a collective responsibility to dialogue, innovate, and legislate for a balanced digital society that honors both the immense potential of the digital age and the timeless value of privacy.

Interested in joining IEEE Digital Privacy? IEEE Digital Privacy is an IEEE-wide effort dedicated to champion the digital privacy needs of the individuals. This initiative strives to bring the voice of technologists to the digital privacy discussion and solutions, incorporating a holistic approach to address privacy that also includes economic, legal, and social perspectives. Join the IEEE Digital Privacy Community to stay involved with the initiative program activities and connect with others in the field.

10 Reasons Why Privacy Rights are Important

The right to privacy is a enshrined in article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), article 17 in the legally binding International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and in article 16 of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC). Many national constitutions and human rights documents mention the right to privacy. In the US Constitution, it isn’t explicitly stated, but experts infer it from several amendments, including the Fourth Amendment. It outlines that people have the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” In many cases, the US Supreme Court has upheld the right to privacy. There are also many privacy laws designed to protect personal data from the government and corporations. The rise of the internet has complicated privacy laws and many believe that the law has fallen behind. In the United States, there is no central federal privacy law. The right to privacy also intersects with many other human rights such as freedom of expression, the right to seek, receive and impart information and freedom of association and assembly.

Why do privacy rights matter so much? Here are 10 reasons why:

#1. Privacy rights prevent the government from spying on people (without cause)

The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens, but it often crosses the line when it comes to surveillance. In 2013, Edward Snowden blew the whistle on the NSA’s spying program, bringing the issue of privacy into the spotlight. The balancing act between national security, freedom of expression, surveillance and privacy rights is tricky. It’s generally agreed upon that if the government doesn’t have a reason to spy on someone, it shouldn’t. No one wants to live in a Big Brother state.

#2. Privacy rights keep groups from using personal data for their own goals

When in the wrong hands, personal information can be wielded as a powerful tool. The Cambridge Analytica scandal is a perfect example of this. This organization used data taken from Facebook (without user consent) to influence voters with political ads. Privacy rights mean that groups can’t take your data without your knowledge/consent and use it for their own goals. In a time where technology companies like Facebook, Amazon, Google, and others collect and store personal information, privacy rights preventing them from using the data how they please are very important.

#3. Privacy rights help ensure those who steal or misuse data are held accountable

When privacy is recognized as a basic human right, there are consequences for those who disrespect it. While there are many “soft” examples of personal data use, like targeted ads, established privacy rights draw a line in the sand. Without these restrictions, corporations and governments are more likely to steal and misuse data without consequence. Privacy laws are necessary for the protection of privacy rights.

#4. Privacy rights help maintain social boundaries

Everyone has things they don’t want certain people to know. Having the right to establish boundaries is important for healthy relationships and careers. In the past, putting up boundaries simply meant choosing to not talk about specific topics. Today, the amount of personal information kept online makes the process more complicated. Social media can reveal a lot of information we don’t want certain people (or strangers) to know. Media platforms are obligated to offer security features. Having control over who knows what gives us peace of mind.

#5. Privacy rights help build trust

In all relationships, trust is essential . When it comes to the personal data given to a doctor or a bank , people need to feel confident that the information is safe. Respecting privacy rights builds up that confidence. Privacy rights also give a person confidence that if the other party breaks that trust, there will be consequences.

#6. Privacy rights ensure we have control over our data

If it’s your data, you should have control over it. Privacy rights dictate that your data can only be used in ways you agree to and that you can access any information about yourself. If you didn’t have this control, you would feel helpless. It would also make you very vulnerable to more powerful forces in society. Privacy rights put you in the driver’s seat of your own life.

#7. Privacy rights protect freedom of speech and thought

If privacy rights weren’t established, everything you do could be monitored. That means certain thoughts and expressions could be given a negative label. You could be tracked based on your personal opinions about anything. If privacy rights didn’t let you keep your work and home life separate, “thought crimes” or what you say off the clock could get you in trouble. Privacy rights protect your ability to think and say what you want without fear of an all-seeing eye.

#8. Privacy rights let you engage freely in politics

There’s a reason that casting your vote is done confidentially. You are also not required to tell anyone who you voted for. Privacy rights let you follow your own opinion on politics without anyone else seeing. This is important in families with differing worldviews. It also protects you from losing your job because of your political leanings. While you can’t control what people think about you because of your views, you do have the right to not share more than you’re comfortable with.

#9. Privacy rights protect reputations

We’ve all posted something online that we regret or done something foolish. It can come back to haunt us and ruin our reputations. Privacy rights help protect us and can give us the power to get certain information removed. The EU specifically addresses this with the “ right to be forgotten ” law. This lets people remove private information from internet searches under some circumstances by filing a request . Revenge porn, which is a violation of privacy, is a big example of personal data that can destroy a person’s reputation.

#10. Privacy rights protect your finances

Companies that store personal data should protect that information because of privacy rights. When companies fail to make security a priority, it can have devastating consequences. You can have your identity stolen, credit card numbers revealed, and so on. When you give your financial information to a specific entity, you are trusting them to respect your privacy rights.

Take a free course on privacy rights by top universities!

15 Inspiring Quotes for Transgender Day of Visibility

Freedom of Expression 101: Definition, Examples, Limitations

15 Trusted Charities Addressing Child Poverty

12 Trusted Charities Advancing Women’s Rights

13 Facts about Child Labor

Environmental Racism 101: Definition, Examples, Ways to Take Action

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Why We Care about Privacy

Markkula Center for Applied Ethics
Focus Areas
Internet Ethics
Internet Ethics Resources

The importance of privacy for human dignity, autonomy, and relationships

In what follows we will consider the most important arguments in favor of privacy.

There are many ways a person can be harmed by the revelation of sensitive personal information. Medical records, psychological tests and interviews, court records, financial records--whether from banks, credit bureaus or the IRS--welfare records, sites visited on the Internet and a variety of other sources hold many intimate details of a person's life. The revelation of such information can leave the subjects vulnerable to many abuses.

Good information is needed for good decisions. It might seem like the more information the better. But sometimes that information is misused, or even used for malicious purposes. For example, there is a great deal of misunderstanding in our society about mental illness and those who suffer from it. If it becomes known that a person has a history of mental illness, that person could be harassed and shunned by neighbors. The insensitive remarks and behavior of others can cause the person serious distress and embarrassment. Because of prejudice and discrimination, a mentally ill person who is quite capable of living a normal, productive life can be denied housing, employment and other basic needs.

Similarly someone with an arrest record, even where there is no conviction and the person is in fact innocent, can suffer severe harassment and discrimination. A number of studies have shown that employers are far less likely to hire someone with an arrest record, even when the charges have been dropped or the person has been acquitted

In addition, because subjects can be damaged so seriously by the release of sensitive personal information, they are also vulnerable to blackmail and extortion by those who have access to that information.

Privacy protection is necessary to safeguard against such abuses.

Privacy is also needed in the ordinary conduct of human affairs, to facilitate social interchange. James Rachels, for example, argues that privacy is an essential prerequisite for forming relationships. The degree of intimacy in a relationship is determined in part by how much personal information is revealed. One reveals things to a friend that one would not disclose to a casual acquaintance. What one tells one's spouse is quite different from what one would discuss with one's employer. This is true of more functional relationships as well. People tell things to their doctors or therapists that they do not want anyone else to know, for example. These privileged relationships, whether personal or functional, require a special level of openness and trust that is only possible if there is an assurance that what is revealed will be kept private. As Rachel's points out, a husband and wife will behave differently in the presence of a third party than when they are alone. If they were always under observation, they could not enjoy the degree of intimacy that a marriage should have. Charles Fried puts it more broadly. Privacy, he writes, is "necessarily related to ends and relations of the most fundamental sort: respect, love, friendship and trust... without privacy they are simply inconceivable."

The analysis of Rachels and Fried suggests a deeper and more fundamental issue: personal freedom. As Deborah Johnson has observed, "To recognize an individual as an autonomous being, an end in himself, entails letting that individual live his life as he chooses. Of course, there are limits to this, but one of the critical ways that an individual controls his life is by choosing with whom he will have relationships and what kind of relationships these will be.... Information mediates relationships. Thus when one cannot control who has information about one, one loses considerable autonomy."

To lose control of personal information is to lose control of who we are and who we can be in relation to the rest of society. A normal person's social life is rich and varied, encompassing many different roles and relationships. Each requires a different , a different face. This does not necessarily entail deception, only that different aspects of the person are revealed in different roles. Control over personal information and how and to whom it is revealed, therefore, plays an important part in one's ability to choose and realize one's place in society. This operates on many different levels. On a personal level, for example, one ought to be able to choose one's friends. That means that one should be able to choose to whom to reveal some of the personal revelations that are only shared among friends. This choice is only meaningful if one can also choose to exclude some from friendship and the privileged revelations that come with it. Consider the case of Carrie and Jim. Jim met Carrie at a party and was immediately smitten by her grace and beauty. Unfortunately for Jim it was not mutual. Carrie made it quite clear she had no interest in any kind of relationship. But this brush-off just fueled Jim's obsession with her. He began to stalk her, following her wherever she went and looking her up online, until he knew her daily schedule, her friends, and her favorite shops and restaurants. He did careful research on her trash, reading her letters and inspecting her receipts, learning what kind of cosmetics she used and what her favorite ice cream was. He even peeked through her window at night to see what she wore and how she behaved when she was alone. Even if Jim never did anything to attack or harass Carrie, even if she never found out about his prying, she has lost some of her freedom. She did not want him to have access to her personal life, but he seized it anyway.

Privacy is an issue in other, more professional, relationships as well, as the following case illustrates. Fred Draper grew up in Brooklyn, where as a youth he ran with a very tough crowd. By the time he was 16 he had been convicted of armed robbery and malicious destruction of property, and was on probation until he was eighteen. But Fred was also a very talented student, and he was fortunate enough to have a teacher in high school recognize his potential and take him under his wing. Through a combination of encouragement, guidance and discipline, the teacher was able to get Fred to focus on school and stay out of trouble, so that he graduated with an outstanding record and won a scholarship to NYU. He was successful there also, going on to law school. Upon finishing law school, Fred was hired by a top Wall Street law firm, where he was well on his way to establishing himself as one of their top young lawyers. Then a newspaper reporter took notice of Fred and his growing prominence and decided to see if there was a story there. There was. The reporter traced Fred back to his old neighborhood and learned about his past history. He wrote a story about it, praising Fred for the way he had overcome his past and made a respectable life for himself. But some of Fred clients had a different reaction. They were not comfortable dealing with a former hood from Brooklyn, so they asked that he be taken off their accounts. The firm complied with their wishes and ultimately let Fred go, deciding that he was too much of a liability to keep. This again illustrates the importance of privacy in allowing people the freedom to realize their potentialities. Once the information about his past had leaked out, Fred was no longer able to maintain his professional persona in relation to his clients, a that he had proved he was capable of fulfilling.

Autonomy is part of the broader issue of human dignity, that is, the obligation to treat people not merely as means, to be bought and sold and used, but as valuable and worthy of respect in themselves. As the foregoing has made clear, personal information is an extension of the person. To have access to that information is to have access to the person in a particularly intimate way. When some personal information is taken and sold or distributed, especially against the person's will, whether it is a diary or personal letters, a record of buying habits, grades in school, a list of friends and associates or a psychological history, it is as if some part of the person has been alienated and turned into a commodity. In that way the person is treated merely as a thing, a means to be used for some other end.

Privacy is even more necessary as a safeguard of freedom in the relationships between individuals and groups. As Alan Westin has pointed out, surveillance and publicity are powerful instruments of social control. If individuals know that their actions and dispositions are constantly being observed, commented on and criticized, they find it much harder to do anything that deviates from accepted social behavior. There does not even have to be an explicit threat of retaliation. "Visibility itself provides a powerful method of enforcing norms." Most people are afraid to stand apart, to be different, if it means being subject to piercing scrutiny. The "deliberate penetration of the individual's protective shell, his psychological armor, would leave him naked to ridicule and shame and would put him under the control of those who know his secrets." Under these circumstances they find it better simply to conform. This is the situation characterized in George Orwell's where the pervasive surveillance of "Big Brother" was enough to keep most citizens under rigid control.

Therefore privacy, as protection from excessive scrutiny, is necessary if individuals are to be free to be themselves. Everyone needs some room to break social norms, to engage in small "permissible deviations" that help define a person's individuality. People need to be able to think outrageous thoughts, make scandalous statements and pick their noses once in a while. They need to be able to behave in ways that are not dictated to them by the surrounding society. If every appearance, action, word and thought of theirs is captured and posted on a social network visible to the rest of the world, they lose that freedom to be themselves. As Brian Stelter wrote in the on the loss of anonymity in today's online world, "The collective intelligence of the Internet's two billion users, and the digital fingerprints that so many users leave on Web sites, combine to make it more and more likely that every embarrassing video, every intimate photo, and every indelicate e-mail is attributed to its source, whether that source wants it to be or not. This intelligence makes the public sphere more public than ever before and sometimes forces personal lives into public view."

This ability to develop one's unique individuality is especially important in a democracy, which values and depends on creativity, nonconformism and the free interchange of diverse ideas. That is where a democracy gets its vitality. Thus, as Westin has observed, "Just as a social balance favoring disclosure and surveillance over privacy is a functional necessity for totalitarian systems, so a balance that ensures strong citadels of individual and group privacy and limits both disclosure and surveillance is a prerequisite for liberal democratic societies. The democratic society relies on publicity as a control over government, and on privacy as a shield for group and individual life."

When Brandeis and Warren wrote their seminal article on privacy over one hundred years ago, their primary concern was with the social pressure caused by excessive exposure to public scrutiny of the private affairs of individuals. The problem for them was the popular press, which represented the "monolithic, impersonal and value-free forces of modern society," undermining the traditional values of rural society, which had been nurtured and protected by local institutions such as family, church and other associations. The exposure of the affairs of the well-bred to the curiosity of the masses, Brandeis and Warren feared, had a leveling effect which undermined what was noble and virtuous in society, replacing it with the base and the trivial.

Even apparently harmless gossip, when widely and persistently circulated, is potent for evil. It both belittles and perverts. It belittles by inverting the relative importance of things, thus dwarfing the thoughts and aspirations of a people. When personal gossip attains the dignity of print, and crowds the space available for matters of real interest to the community, what wonder that the ignorant and thoughtless mistake its relative importance.... Triviality destroys at once robustness of thought and delicacy of feeling. No enthusiasm can flourish, no generous impulse can survive under its blighting influence.

For Brandeis and Warren, privacy was a means of protecting the freedom of the virtuous to maintain their values against the corrupting influence of the mass media that catered to people's basest instincts.

Although the degrading effect of the mass media is still a problem, today a more serious threat to freedom comes from governments and other large institutions. Over the last century, governments have developed sophisticated methods of surveillance as a means of controlling their subjects. This is especially true of totalitarian states, as the passage from Westin quoted above indicates. The Soviet Union, Communist China, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and white-run South Africa all used covert and overt observation, interrogation, eavesdropping, reporting by neighbors and other means of data collection to convince their subjects that independent, "antisocial" thought, speech and behavior was unacceptable. In many cases the mere presence of the surveillance was enough to keep people in line. Where it was not, the data collected was used to identify, round up and punish elements of the population that were deemed dangerous. For example, Ignazio Silone, in his book described the use of surveillance in Fascist Italy in this way:

It is well-known [says Minorca] that the police have their informers in every section of every big factory, in every bank, in every big office. In every block of flats the porter is, by law, a stool pigeon for the police.... This state of affairs spreads suspicion and distrust throughout all classes of the population. On this degradation of man into a frightened animal, who quivers with fear and hates his neighbor in his fear, and watches him, betrays him, sells him, and then lives in fear of discovery, the dictatorship is based. The real organization on which the system in this country is based is the secret manipulation of fear.

While totalitarian regimes may not seem as powerful or as sinister as they did 50 years ago, surveillance is still used in many places as an instrument of oppression. For example Philip Zimmerman, the author of the PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) data encryption program, reports receiving a letter from a human rights activist in the former Yugoslavia that contained the following testimonial:

We are part of a network of not-for-profit agencies, working among other things for human rights in the Balkans. Our various offices have been raided by various police forces looking for evidence of spying or subversive activities. Our mail has been regularly tampered with and our office in Romania has a constant wiretap. Last year in Zagreb, the security police raided our office and confiscated our computers in the hope of retrieving information about the identity of people who had complained about their activities. Without PGP we would not be able to function and protect our client group. Thanks to PGP I can sleep at night knowing that no amount of prying will compromise our clients.

More recently social media and the Internet played major roles in the "Arab Spring" uprisings in the Middle East, causing Egypt and Libya to shut down the Internet in their countries in an attempt to stifle dissent. In China there has been an ongoing battle between the government and activist groups over government monitoring and censorship of the Internet.

Even in a democracy, there is always the danger that surveillance can be used as a means of control. In the United States, for example, where freedom is such an important part of the national ethos, the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency (NSA) and the armed forces have frequently kept dossiers on dissidents. The NSA from 1952 to 1974 kept files on about 75,000 Americans, including civil rights and antiwar activists, and even members of Congress. During the Vietnam war, the CIA's Operation Chaos collected data on over 300,000 Americans. Since then the NSA has had an ongoing program to monitor electronic communications, both in the U.S. and abroad, which has led to constant battles with individuals and groups who have sought to protect the privacy of those communications through encryption and other technologies.

Some of the most famous incidents of surveillance of dissidents, of course, occurred during the Nixon administration in the early 1970s. For example, when Daniel Ellsberg was suspected of leaking the Pentagon Papers, an internal critique of government conduct of the Vietnam war, Nixon's agents broke into the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist and stole his records. And it was a bungled attempt at surveillance of Nixon's political opposition, as well as illegal use of tax returns from the IRS, that ultimately brought down the Nixon administration. More recently, during the 1996 presidential campaign, it was revealed that the Clinton White House had access to the FBI investigative records of over 300 Republicans who had served in the Reagan and Bush administrations. The Clinton administration claimed it was all a mistake caused by using an out-of-date list of White House staff, while the challenger Bob Dole accused them of compiling an "enemies list." >sup>24 Whatever the motivation, the head of the FBI termed the use of the files "egregious violations of privacy."

Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, there has been even greater urgency in the government's efforts to monitor the activities and communications of people, both foreigners and its own citizens, in order to identify and prevent terrorist threats. The Patriot Act, passed less than two months after 9/11, greatly expanded the government's authority to intercept electronic communications, such as emails and phone calls, including those of U.S. citizens. As a result government agencies have been building the technological and organizational capabilities to monitor the activities and communications of their own citizens. For example, magazine revealed in a recent report how the National Security Agency

has transformed itself into the largest, most covert, and potentially most intrusive intelligence agency ever created. In the process—and for the first time since Watergate and the other scandals of the Nixon administration—the NSA has turned its surveillance apparatus on the US and its citizens. It has established listening posts throughout the nation to collect and sift through billions of email messages and phone calls, whether they originate within the country or overseas. It has created a supercomputer of almost unimaginable speed to look for patterns and unscramble codes. Finally, the agency has begun building a place to store all the trillions of words and thoughts and whispers captured in its electronic net. And, of course, it's all being done in secret. To those on the inside, the old adage that NSA stands for Never Say Anything applies more than ever.

The FBI, the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Department of Homeland Security also have many programs to monitor citizens in general, not just those who are under suspicion. These efforts include sifting through media references, tracking chatter on social networks, and monitoring peoples' movements through license plate scanners and video cameras.

The mere knowledge that American citizens could be the subjects of surveillance can in itself have a chilling effect on political freedom. "Now it is much more difficult than it once was to dismiss the possibility that one's phone is being tapped, or that one's tax returns may be used for unfriendly political purposes, or that one's life has become the subject of a CIA file. The realization that these activities take place, whether they really do or not in any particular instance, has potentially destructive effects on the openness of social systems to innovation and dissent."

At times the government in the United States has gone beyond surveillance and intimidation and has used the data gathered as a basis for overt oppression. One of the most blatant examples is the internment of over 100,000 Japanese Americans, most of them American citizens, during World War II. The Justice Department used data from the Census Bureau to identify residential areas where there were large concentrations of Japanese Americans, and the army was sent in to round them up. They were taken away from their homes and held in concentration camps for the duration of the war.

Governments do need information, including personal information, to govern effectively and to protect the security of their citizens. But citizens also need protection from the overzealous or malicious use of that information, especially by governments that, in this age, have enormous bureaucratic and technological power to gather and use the information.

When we speak of privacy, particularly as a right, we focus on the individual. The individual must be shielded from the prying curiosity of others and from prejudice and discrimination. The individual's autonomy and control over his or her person must be preserved. The individual must be protected from intimidation and coercion by government.

These are important considerations; but not the whole story. For the human person does not exist purely as an individual. People live their lives as members of society. In fact they are members of many societies, which may include families, circles of friends, work organizations, churches, voluntary associations, civic organizations, city, state and nation. These associations are not merely preferences or matters of convenience. To be human is to be in relationship. Therefore social obligations, that is, all that is required to maintain the complex Web of relationships in which each person lives, are fundamental human obligations. Moreover each individual has an obligation to contribute to the good of society, the so-called "common good."

These obligations include the sharing of personal information, which is a necessary part of any meaningful relationship, whether it is personal, community, political or bureaucratic. Friendship necessarily requires self-revelation, as do family relationships on an even more intimate level. Belonging to a voluntary association entails sharing something of one's history, one's ideas and aspirations, and one's current circumstances. And government requires a certain amount of information on its citizens in order to govern efficiently, provide for their security and distribute benefits and obligations fairly. The same in general can be said of employers and their employees.

The obligation to share information for the common good does not always take precedence over the right to privacy. Rather the two must be held in balance, for both are necessary for a fully human life. According to John B. Young, in his book on privacy,

The right to privacy is inherent in the right to liberty, but the life of the individual in all societies has to strike a balance between freedom and discipline. Insufficient freedom will subdue the spirit of enterprise and resolution on which so much of civilized progress depends, whereas unbridled freedom will clash inexorably with the way of life of others. It is inevitable therefore that there must be some measure of restraint on the activities of members of a community, and in order to control people in a modern and complex society information about them and their behavior is indispensable. The concomitant price which the individual must pay can be measured in terms of loss of privacy.

Even Alan Westin, the great privacy advocate acknowledges,

The individual's desire for privacy is never absolute, since participation in society is an equally powerful desire. Thus each individual is continually engaged in a personal adjustment process in which he balances the desire for privacy with the desire for disclosure and communication of himself to others, in light of the environmental conditions and social norms set by the society in which he lives.

These considerations lead to the following principle on information privacy:

Based on the above considerations, we can define an invasion of (informational) privacy as having the following elements:

The third condition recognizes that a person comes to be known in many ways in the course of everyday life, and that is not, in itself, an invasion of privacy. It may be well known to Jason's neighbors that he goes jogging through the neighborhood at 7 AM every day. There is no invasion of privacy there because it is reasonable to assume that he would be observed and recognized by them. If he wanted his jogging to be completely private, he would have to find a more secure and sheltered place to do it. However, there is still an issue of how widely this information should be publicized. Just because people know something, it does not mean that ought to know. For example, if his neighbors compile every shred of observable evidence about Jason's life -- for example, that he and his wife often have loud arguments, that their trash is full of empty whiskey bottles, and that their son visits a probation officer once a month -- and publish it in the local newspaper, it may well be a moral, if not a legal, invasion of privacy.

Condition 4 should be interpreted restrictively as well. Sensitive information collected without the consent of the subject because it was necessary for the public welfare should be available only to those who have a legitimate need for it.

Invasions of privacy as we define them here are of concern for a number of reasons:

(May 20, 1996): 20-22.
2. David Burnham, New York: Random House (1984), pp. 79-80.
3. James Rachels, "Why Privacy is Important," , 4(4), (Summer, 1975): 323-333.
4. ibid, pp. 329-330.
5. Charles Fried, "Privacy," 77(1968): 475:93, reprinted in Ferdinand D. Schoeman (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1984): 203-222.
6. Deborah G. Johnson, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall (1985): 65.
7. Not a real person. This case, like the one before it, is a composite.
8. Alan F. Westin, New York: Atheneum (1967).
9. ibid, p. 20.
10. ibid, p. 32.
11. George Orwell, , New York: Harcourt and Brace (1949).
12. Brian Stelter, "Upending Anonymity, These Days the Web Unmasks Everyone," June 21, 2011,
13. Westin, p. 24.
14. Randall P. Bezanson, " Revisited: Privacy, News, and Social Change, 1890-1990," 80(October, 1992): 1133-1175, p. 1139.
15. Brandeis and Warren, p. 196.
16. quoted in Carl J. Friedrich and Zbigniew K. Brzezinski, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (1963), p. 179.
17. Philip Zimmerman, in a posting to the Cyberpunks newsgroup: [email protected], (March 18, 1996).
18. Lori Andrews, I Know New York: Free Press (2011), pp. 61-63.
19. Howard W. French, "Chinese Discuss Plan to Tighten Restrictions on Cyberspace," (July 4,2006), p. A3.
20. Burnham, pp. 130-131.
21. Steven Levy, Crypto: New York, London: Penguin Viking, (2001).
22. Burnham, p. 176.
23. ibid, p. 104.
24. Jill Zuckman, "Dole Hits Clinton on Files from FBI: Calls Search 'Enemies List,'" (June 9, 1996): 1.
25. Brian McGrory, "FBI Report Condemns File Requests," (June 15, 1996): 1.
26. James Bamford, "The NSA is Building the Country's Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)," (March 15, 2012),
27. Jaikumar Vijayan, "DHS media monitoring could chill public dissent,EPIC warns: Documents show not all of DHS' monitoring has a public safety purpose," (January 16, 2012),
28. Jaikumar Vijayan, "FBI Seeks Social Media Monitoring Tool," (February 14, 2012),
29. Darlene Storm, "ACLU: DEA tracks Americans' movements, plans to data mine license plate records," (May 22, 2012),
30. Peter Monaghan, "Watching the Data Watchers," (March 17, 2006), pp. A18-A28.
31. James B. Rule, Douglas McAdam, Linda Stearns and David Uglow, "Preserving Individual Autonomy in an Information-Oriented Society," in Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling (eds.), Boston: Academic Press (1991): 469-488, pp. 478-79.
32. ibid, pp. 20-25.
33. See, for example, Peter Berger and Richard J. Neuhaus, Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute (1977).
34. John B. Young, "A Look at Privacy," in John B. Young (ed.), New York: John Wiley and Sons (1978): 1-10, p. 1.
35. Westin, p. 7.

Ann Skeet, senior director, leadership ethics, interviewed by KTVU Fox 2.

A fitness tracker aimed at children raises issues of design ethics, incentives, and more.

Irina Raicu, director, internet ethics, quoted by NBC Bay Area.

Home — Essay Samples — Law, Crime & Punishment — Internet Privacy — The Importance of Internet Privacy and Net Neutrality to Internet Users in the Modern Era

The Importance of Internet Privacy and Net Neutrality to Internet Users in The Modern Era

Categories: Internet Privacy

About this sample

Words: 2447 |

13 min read

Published: Oct 31, 2018

Words: 2447 | Pages: 5 | 13 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

Expert in: Law, Crime & Punishment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

4 pages / 1424 words

4 pages / 1669 words

1 pages / 582 words

1 pages / 459 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

With the rise of technology and the internet, children today have access to an unprecedented amount of information at their fingertips. This has sparked a debate among educators and parents about whether the internet is making [...]

The widespread use of the internet and the prevalence of digital content have revolutionized the way we consume and share information. However, this digital era has also brought about challenges in protecting the rights of [...]

Should there be a legal age limit for social media is a question that has gained significant prominence in our digital age. As the influence of social media continues to grow, concerns about its impact on young users' [...]

The internet has become an integral part of our daily lives. With the rise of search engines like Google, accessing information has never been easier. However, as we become increasingly reliant on these tools, there is a growing [...]

Cyber security or information technology security are the techniques of protecting computers, networks, programs and data from unauthorized access or attacks that are aimed for exploitation. There are four types of security [...]

In the modern interconnected world, where the internet serves as both a conduit for information and a platform for social interaction, the issue of internet privacy has become paramount with the increase of new technology [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Privacy and Information Technology

Human beings value their privacy and the protection of their personal sphere of life. They value some control over who knows what about them. They certainly do not want their personal information to be accessible to just anyone at any time. But recent advances in information technology threaten privacy and have reduced the amount of control over personal data and open up the possibility of a range of negative consequences as a result of access to personal data. In the second half of the 20 th century data protection regimes have been put in place as a response to increasing levels of processing of personal data. The 21 st century has become the century of big data and advanced information technology (e.g. forms of deep learning), the rise of big tech companies and the platform economy, which comes with the storage and processing of exabytes of data.

The revelations of Edward Snowden, and more recently the Cambridge Analytica case (Cadwalladr & Graham-Harrison 2018) have demonstrated that worries about negative consequences are real. The technical capabilities to collect, store and search large quantities of data concerning telephone conversations, internet searches and electronic payment are now in place and are routinely used by government agencies and corporate actors alike. The rise of China and the large scale of use and spread of advanced digital technologies for surveillance and control have only added to the concern of many. For business firms, personal data about customers and potential customers are now also a key asset. The scope and purpose of the personal data centred business models of Big Tech (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple) has been described in detail by Shoshana Zuboff (2018) under the label “surveillance capitalism”.

At the same time, the meaning and value of privacy remains the subject of considerable controversy. The combination of increasing power of new technology and the declining clarity and agreement on privacy give rise to problems concerning law, policy and ethics. Many of these conceptual debates and issues are situated in the context of interpretation and analysis of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that was adopted by the EU in spring 2018 as the successor of the EU 1995 Directives, with application far beyond the borders of the European Union.

The focus of this article is on exploring the relationship between information technology and privacy. We will both illustrate the specific threats that IT and innovations in IT pose for privacy and indicate how IT itself might be able to overcome these privacy concerns by being developed in ways that can be termed “privacy-sensitive”, “privacy enhancing” or “privacy respecting”. We will also discuss the role of emerging technologies in the debate, and account for the way in which moral debates are themselves affected by IT.

1.1 Constitutional vs. informational privacy

1.2 accounts of the value of privacy.

1.3 Personal data

1.4 Moral reasons for protecting personal data

1.5 law, regulation, and indirect control over access, 2.1 developments in information technology, 2.2 internet, 2.3 social media, 2.4 big data, 2.5 mobile devices, 2.6 the internet of things, 2.7 e-government, 2.8 surveillance, 3.1 design methods, 3.2 privacy enhancing technologies, 3.3 cryptography, 3.4 identity management, 4. emerging technologies and our understanding of privacy, other internet resources, related entries, 1. conceptions of privacy and the value of privacy.

Discussions about privacy are intertwined with the use of technology. The publication that began the debate about privacy in the Western world was occasioned by the introduction of the newspaper printing press and photography. Samuel D. Warren and Louis Brandeis wrote their article on privacy in the Harvard Law Review (Warren & Brandeis 1890) partly in protest against the intrusive activities of the journalists of those days. They argued that there is a “right to be left alone” based on a principle of “inviolate personality”. Since the publication of that article, the debate about privacy has been fuelled by claims regarding the right of individuals to determine the extent to which others have access to them (Westin 1967) and claims regarding the right of society to know about individuals. Information being a cornerstone of access to individuals, the privacy debate has co-evolved with – and in response to – the development of information technology. It is therefore difficult to conceive of the notions of privacy and discussions about data protection as separate from the way computers, the Internet, mobile computing and the many applications of these basic technologies have evolved.

Inspired by subsequent developments in U.S. law, a distinction can be made between (1) constitutional (or decisional) privacy and (2) tort (or informational) privacy (DeCew 1997). The first refers to the freedom to make one’s own decisions without interference by others in regard to matters seen as intimate and personal, such as the decision to use contraceptives or to have an abortion. The second is concerned with the interest of individuals in exercising control over access to information about themselves and is most often referred to as “informational privacy”. Think here, for instance, about information disclosed on Facebook or other social media. All too easily, such information might be beyond the control of the individual.

Statements about privacy can be either descriptive or normative, depending on whether they are used to describe the way people define situations and conditions of privacy and the way they value them, or are used to indicate that there ought to be constraints on the use of information or information processing. These conditions or constraints typically involve personal information regarding individuals, or ways of information processing that may affect individuals. Informational privacy in a normative sense refers typically to a non-absolute moral right of persons to have direct or indirect control over access to (1) information about oneself, (2) situations in which others could acquire information about oneself, and (3) technology that can be used to generate, process or disseminate information about oneself.

The debates about privacy are almost always revolving around new technology, ranging from genetics and the extensive study of bio-markers, brain imaging, drones, wearable sensors and sensor networks, social media, smart phones, closed circuit television, to government cybersecurity programs, direct marketing, RFID tags, Big Data, head-mounted displays and search engines. There are basically two reactions to the flood of new technology and its impact on personal information and privacy: the first reaction, held by many people in IT industry and in R&D, is that we have zero privacy in the digital age and that there is no way we can protect it, so we should get used to the new world and get over it (Sprenger 1999). The other reaction is that our privacy is more important than ever and that we can and we must attempt to protect it.

In the literature on privacy, there are many competing accounts of the nature and value of privacy (Negley 1966, Rössler 2005). On one end of the spectrum, reductionist accounts argue that privacy claims are really about other values and other things that matter from a moral point of view. According to these views the value of privacy is reducible to these other values or sources of value (Thomson 1975). Proposals that have been defended along these lines mention property rights, security, autonomy, intimacy or friendship, democracy, liberty, dignity, or utility and economic value. Reductionist accounts hold that the importance of privacy should be explained and its meaning clarified in terms of those other values and sources of value (Westin 1967). The opposing view holds that privacy is valuable in itself and its value and importance are not derived from other considerations (see for a discussion Rössler 2004). Views that construe privacy and the personal sphere of life as a human right would be an example of this non-reductionist conception.

More recently a type of privacy account has been proposed in relation to new information technology, which acknowledges that there is a cluster of related moral claims underlying appeals to privacy, but maintains that there is no single essential core of privacy concerns. This approach is referred to as cluster accounts (DeCew 1997; Solove 2006; van den Hoven 1999; Allen 2011; Nissenbaum 2004).

From a descriptive perspective, a recent further addition to the body of privacy accounts are epistemic accounts, where the notion of privacy is analyzed primarily in terms of knowledge or other epistemic states. Having privacy means that others don’t know certain private propositions; lacking privacy means that others do know certain private propositions (Blaauw 2013). An important aspect of this conception of having privacy is that it is seen as a relation (Rubel 2011; Matheson 2007; Blaauw 2013) with three argument places: a subject ( S ), a set of propositions ( P ) and a set of individuals ( I ). Here S is the subject who has (a certain degree of) privacy. P is composed of those propositions the subject wants to keep private (call the propositions in this set ‘personal propositions’), and I is composed of those individuals with respect to whom S wants to keep the personal propositions private.

Another distinction that is useful to make is the one between a European and a US American approach. A bibliometric study suggests that the two approaches are separate in the literature. The first conceptualizes issues of informational privacy in terms of ‘data protection’, the second in terms of ‘privacy’ (Heersmink et al. 2011). In discussing the relationship of privacy matters with technology, the notion of data protection is most helpful, since it leads to a relatively clear picture of what the object of protection is and by which technical means the data can be protected. At the same time it invites answers to the question why the data ought to be protected, pointing to a number of distinctive moral grounds on the basis of which technical, legal and institutional protection of personal data can be justified. Informational privacy is thus recast in terms of the protection of personal data (van den Hoven 2008). This account shows how Privacy, Technology and Data Protection are related, without conflating Privacy and Data Protection.

1.3 Personal Data

Personal information or data is information or data that is linked or can be linked to individual persons. Examples include explicitly stated characteristics such as a person‘s date of birth, sexual preference, whereabouts, religion, but also the IP address of your computer or metadata pertaining to these kinds of information. In addition, personal data can also be more implicit in the form of behavioural data, for example from social media, that can be linked to individuals. Personal data can be contrasted with data that is considered sensitive, valuable or important for other reasons, such as secret recipes, financial data, or military intelligence. Data used to secure other information, such as passwords, are not considered here. Although such security measures (passwords) may contribute to privacy, their protection is only instrumental to the protection of other (more private) information, and the quality of such security measures is therefore out of the scope of our considerations here.

A relevant distinction that has been made in philosophical semantics is that between the referential and the attributive use of descriptive labels of persons (van den Hoven 2008). Personal data is defined in the law as data that can be linked with a natural person. There are two ways in which this link can be made; a referential mode and a non-referential mode. The law is primarily concerned with the ‘referential use’ of descriptions or attributes, the type of use that is made on the basis of a (possible) acquaintance relationship of the speaker with the object of his knowledge. “The murderer of Kennedy must be insane”, uttered while pointing to him in court is an example of a referentially used description. This can be contrasted with descriptions that are used attributively as in “the murderer of Kennedy must be insane, whoever he is”. In this case, the user of the description is not – and may never be – acquainted with the person he is talking about or intends to refer to. If the legal definition of personal data is interpreted referentially, much of the data that could at some point in time be brought to bear on persons would be unprotected; that is, the processing of this data would not be constrained on moral grounds related to privacy or personal sphere of life, since it does not “refer” to persons in a straightforward way and therefore does not constitute “personal data” in a strict sense.

The following types of moral reasons for the protection of personal data and for providing direct or indirect control over access to those data by others can be distinguished (van den Hoven 2008):

Prevention of harm: Unrestricted access by others to one‘s bank account, profile, social media account, cloud repositories, characteristics, and whereabouts can be used to harm the data subject in a variety of ways.
Informational inequality: Personal data have become commodities. Individuals are usually not in a good position to negotiate contracts about the use of their data and do not have the means to check whether partners live up to the terms of the contract. Data protection laws, regulation and governance aim at establishing fair conditions for drafting contracts about personal data transmission and exchange and providing data subjects with checks and balances, guarantees for redress and means to monitor compliance with the terms of the contract. Flexible pricing, price targeting and price gauging, dynamic negotiations are typically undertaken on the basis of asymmetrical information and great disparities in access to information. Also choice modelling in marketing, micro-targeting in political campaigns, and nudging in policy implementation exploit a basic informational inequality of principal and agent.
Informational injustice and discrimination: Personal information provided in one sphere or context (for example, health care) may change its meaning when used in another sphere or context (such as commercial transactions) and may lead to discrimination and disadvantages for the individual. This is related to the discussion on contextual integrity by Nissenbaum (2004) and Walzerian spheres of justice (Van den Hoven 2008).
Encroachment on moral autonomy and human dignity: Lack of privacy may expose individuals to outside forces that influence their choices and bring them to make decisions they would not have otherwise made. Mass surveillance leads to a situation where routinely, systematically, and continuously individuals make choices and decisions because they know others are watching them. This affects their status as autonomous beings and has what sometimes is described as a “chilling effect” on them and on society. Closely related are considerations of violations of respect for persons and human dignity. The massive accumulation of data relevant to a person‘s identity (e.g. brain-computer interfaces, identity graphs, digital doubles or digital twins, analysis of the topology of one‘s social networks) may give rise to the idea that we know a particular person since there is so much information about her. It can be argued that being able to figure people out on the basis of their big data constitutes an epistemic and moral immodesty (Bruynseels & Van den Hoven 2015), which fails to respect the fact that human beings are subjects with private mental states that have a certain quality that is inaccessible from an external perspective (third or second person perspective) – however detailed and accurate that may be. Respecting privacy would then imply a recognition of this moral phenomenology of human persons, i.e. recognising that a human being is always more than advanced digital technologies can deliver.

These considerations all provide good moral reasons for limiting and constraining access to personal data and providing individuals with control over their data.

Acknowledging that there are moral reasons for protecting personal data, data protection laws are in force in almost all countries. The basic moral principle underlying these laws is the requirement of informed consent for processing by the data subject, providing the subject (at least in principle) with control over potential negative effects as discussed above. Furthermore, processing of personal information requires that its purpose be specified, its use be limited, individuals be notified and allowed to correct inaccuracies, and the holder of the data be accountable to oversight authorities (OECD 1980). Because it is impossible to guarantee compliance of all types of data processing in all these areas and applications with these rules and laws in traditional ways, so-called “privacy-enhancing technologies” (PETs) and identity management systems are expected to replace human oversight in many cases. The challenge with respect to privacy in the twenty-first century is to assure that technology is designed in such a way that it incorporates privacy requirements in the software, architecture, infrastructure, and work processes in a way that makes privacy violations unlikely to occur. New generations of privacy regulations (e.g. GDPR) now require standardly a “privacy by design” approach. The data ecosystems and socio-technical systems, supply chains, organisations, including incentive structures, business processes, and technical hardware and software, training of personnel, should all be designed in such a way that the likelihood of privacy violations is a low as possible.

2. The impact of information technology on privacy

“Information technology” refers to automated systems for storing, processing, and distributing information. Typically, this involves the use of computers and communication networks. The amount of information that can be stored or processed in an information system depends on the technology used. The capacity of the technology has increased rapidly over the past decades, in accordance with Moore’s law. This holds for storage capacity, processing capacity, and communication bandwidth. We are now capable of storing and processing data on the exabyte level. For illustration, to store 100 exabytes of data on 720 MB CD-ROM discs would require a stack of them that would almost reach the moon.

These developments have fundamentally changed our practices of information provisioning. The rapid changes have increased the need for careful consideration of the desirability of effects. Some even speak of a digital revolution as a technological leap similar to the industrial revolution, or a digital revolution as a revolution in understanding human nature and the world, similar to the revolutions of Copernicus, Darwin and Freud (Floridi 2008). In both the technical and the epistemic sense, emphasis has been put on connectivity and interaction. Physical space has become less important, information is ubiquitous, and social relations have adapted as well.

As we have described privacy in terms of moral reasons for imposing constraints on access to and/or use of personal information, the increased connectivity imposed by information technology poses many questions. In a descriptive sense, access has increased, which, in a normative sense, requires consideration of the desirability of this development, and evaluation of the potential for regulation by technology (Lessig 1999), institutions, and/or law.

As connectivity increases access to information, it also increases the possibility for agents to act based on the new sources of information. When these sources contain personal information, risks of harm, inequality, discrimination, and loss of autonomy easily emerge. For example, your enemies may have less difficulty finding out where you are, users may be tempted to give up privacy for perceived benefits in online environments, and employers may use online information to avoid hiring certain groups of people. Furthermore, systems rather than users may decide which information is displayed, thus confronting users only with news that matches their profiles.

Although the technology operates on a device level, information technology consists of a complex system of socio-technical practices, and its context of use forms the basis for discussing its role in changing possibilities for accessing information, and thereby impacting privacy. We will discuss some specific developments and their impact in the following sections.

The Internet, originally conceived in the 1960s and developed in the 1980s as a scientific network for exchanging information, was not designed for the purpose of separating information flows (Michener 1999). The World Wide Web of today was not foreseen, and neither was the possibility of misuse of the Internet. Social network sites emerged for use within a community of people who knew each other in real life – at first, mostly in academic settings – rather than being developed for a worldwide community of users (Ellison 2007). It was assumed that sharing with close friends would not cause any harm, and privacy and security only appeared on the agenda when the network grew larger. This means that privacy concerns often had to be dealt with as add-ons rather than by-design.

A major theme in the discussion of Internet privacy revolves around the use of cookies (Palmer 2005). Cookies are small pieces of data that web sites store on the user’s computer, in order to enable personalization of the site. However, some cookies can be used to track the user across multiple web sites (tracking cookies), enabling for example advertisements for a product the user has recently viewed on a totally different site. Again, it is not always clear what the generated information is used for. Laws requiring user consent for the use of cookies are not always successful in terms of increasing the level of control, as the consent requests interfere with task flows, and the user may simply click away any requests for consent (Leenes & Kosta 2015). Similarly, features of social network sites embedded in other sites (e.g. “like”-button) may allow the social network site to identify the sites visited by the user (Krishnamurthy & Wills 2009).

The recent development of cloud computing increases the many privacy concerns (Ruiter & Warnier 2011). Previously, whereas information would be available from the web, user data and programs would still be stored locally, preventing program vendors from having access to the data and usage statistics. In cloud computing, both data and programs are online (in the cloud), and it is not always clear what the user-generated and system-generated data are used for. Moreover, as data are located elsewhere in the world, it is not even always obvious which law is applicable, and which authorities can demand access to the data. Data gathered by online services and apps such as search engines and games are of particular concern here. Which data are used and communicated by applications (browsing history, contact lists, etc.) is not always clear, and even when it is, the only choice available to the user may be not to use the application.

Some special features of Internet privacy (social media and big data) are discussed in the following sections.

Social media pose additional challenges. The question is not merely about the moral reasons for limiting access to information, it is also about the moral reasons for limiting the invitations to users to submit all kinds of personal information. Social network sites invite the user to generate more data, to increase the value of the site (“your profile is …% complete”). Users are tempted to exchange their personal data for the benefits of using services, and provide both this data and their attention as payment for the services. In addition, users may not even be aware of what information they are tempted to provide, as in the aforementioned case of the “like”-button on other sites. Merely limiting the access to personal information does not do justice to the issues here, and the more fundamental question lies in steering the users’ behaviour of sharing. When the service is free, the data is needed as a form of payment.

One way of limiting the temptation of users to share is requiring default privacy settings to be strict. Even then, this limits access for other users (“friends of friends”), but it does not limit access for the service provider. Also, such restrictions limit the value and usability of the social network sites themselves, and may reduce positive effects of such services. A particular example of privacy-friendly defaults is the opt-in as opposed to the opt-out approach. When the user has to take an explicit action to share data or to subscribe to a service or mailing list, the resulting effects may be more acceptable to the user. However, much still depends on how the choice is framed (Bellman, Johnson, & Lohse 2001).

Users generate loads of data when online. This is not only data explicitly entered by the user, but also numerous statistics on user behavior: sites visited, links clicked, search terms entered, etc. Data mining can be employed to extract patterns from such data, which can then be used to make decisions about the user. These may only affect the online experience (advertisements shown), but, depending on which parties have access to the information, they may also impact the user in completely different contexts.

In particular, big data may be used in profiling the user (Hildebrandt 2008), creating patterns of typical combinations of user properties, which can then be used to predict interests and behavior. An innocent application is “you may also like …”, but, depending on the available data, more sensitive derivations may be made, such as most probable religion or sexual preference. These derivations could then in turn lead to inequal treatment or discrimination. When a user can be assigned to a particular group, even only probabilistically, this may influence the actions taken by others (Taylor, Floridi, & Van der Sloot 2017). For example, profiling could lead to refusal of insurance or a credit card, in which case profit is the main reason for discrimination. When such decisions are based on profiling, it may be difficult to challenge them or even find out the explanations behind them. Profiling could also be used by organizations or possible future governments that have discrimination of particular groups on their political agenda, in order to find their targets and deny them access to services, or worse.

Big data does not only emerge from Internet transactions. Similarly, data may be collected when shopping, when being recorded by surveillance cameras in public or private spaces, or when using smartcard-based public transport payment systems. All these data could be used to profile citizens, and base decisions upon such profiles. For example, shopping data could be used to send information about healthy food habits to particular individuals, but again also for decisions on insurance. According to EU data protection law, permission is needed for processing personal data, and they can only be processed for the purpose for which they were obtained. Specific challenges, therefore, are (a) how to obtain permission when the user does not explicitly engage in a transaction (as in case of surveillance), and (b) how to prevent “function creep”, i.e. data being used for different purposes after they are collected (as may happen for example with DNA databases (Dahl & Sætnan 2009).

One particular concern could emerge from genetics and genomic data (Tavani 2004, Bruynseels & van den Hoven, 2015). Like other data, genomics can be used to make predictions, and in particular could predict risks of diseases. Apart from others having access to detailed user profiles, a fundamental question here is whether the individual should know what is known about her. In general, users could be said to have a right to access any information stored about them, but in this case, there may also be a right not to know, in particular when knowledge of the data (e.g. risks of diseases) would reduce the well-being – by causing fear, for instance – without enabling treatment. With respect to previous examples, one may not want to know the patterns in one’s own shopping behavior either.

As users increasingly own networked devices such as smart phones, mobile devices collect and send more and more data. These devices typically contain a range of data-generating sensors, including GPS (location), movement sensors, and cameras, and may transmit the resulting data via the Internet or other networks. One particular example concerns location data. Many mobile devices have a GPS sensor that registers the user’s location, but even without a GPS sensor, approximate locations can be derived, for example by monitoring the available wireless networks. As location data links the online world to the user’s physical environment, with the potential of physical harm (stalking, burglary during holidays, etc.), such data are often considered particularly sensitive.

Many of these devices also contain cameras which, when applications have access, can be used to take pictures. These can be considered sensors as well, and the data they generate may be particularly private. For sensors like cameras, it is assumed that the user is aware when they are activated, and privacy depends on such knowledge. For webcams, a light typically indicates whether the camera is on, but this light may be manipulated by malicious software. In general, “reconfigurable technology” (Dechesne, Warnier, & van den Hoven 2011) that handles personal data raises the question of user knowledge of the configuration.

Devices connected to the Internet are not limited to user-owned computing devices like smartphones. Many devices contain chips and/or are connected in the so-called Internet of Things. RFID (radio frequency identification) chips can be read from a limited distance, such that you can hold them in front of a reader rather than inserting them. EU and US passports have RFID chips with protected biometric data, but information like the user’s nationality may easily leak when attempting to read such devices (see Richter, Mostowski & Poll 2008, in Other Internet Resources). “Smart” RFIDs are also embedded in public transport payment systems. “Dumb” RFIDs, basically only containing a number, appear in many kinds of products as a replacement of the barcode, and for use in logistics. Still, such chips could be used to trace a person once it is known that he carries an item containing a chip.

In the home, there are smart meters for automatically reading and sending electricity and water consumption, and thermostats and other devices that can be remotely controlled by the owner. Such devices again generate statistics, and these can be used for mining and profiling. In the future, more and more household appliances will be connected, each generating its own information. Ambient intelligence (Brey 2005), and ubiquitous computing, along with the Internet of Things (Friedewald & Raabe 2011), also enable automatic adaptation of the environment to the user, based on explicit preferences and implicit observations, and user autonomy is a central theme in considering the privacy implications of such devices. In general, the move towards a service-oriented provisioning of goods, with suppliers being informed about how the products are used through IT and associated connectivity, requires consideration of the associated privacy and transparency concerns (Pieters 2013). For example, users will need to be informed when connected devices contain a microphone and how and when it is used.

Government and public administration have undergone radical transformations as a result of the availability of advanced IT systems as well. Examples of these changes are biometric passports, online e-government services, voting systems, a variety of online citizen participation tools and platforms or online access to recordings of sessions of parliament and government committee meetings.

Consider the case of voting in elections. Information technology may play a role in different phases in the voting process, which may have different impact on voter privacy. Most countries have a requirement that elections are to be held by secret ballot, to prevent vote buying and coercion. In this case, the voter is supposed to keep her vote private, even if she would want to reveal it . For information technology used for casting votes, this is defined as the requirement of receipt-freeness or coercion-resistance (Delaune, Kremer & Ryan 2006). In polling stations, the authorities see to it that the voter keeps the vote private, but such surveillance is not possible when voting by mail or online, and it cannot even be enforced by technological means, as someone can always watch while the voter votes. In this case, privacy is not only a right but also a duty, and information technology developments play an important role in the possibilities of the voter to fulfill this duty, as well as the possibilities of the authorities to verify this. In a broader sense, e-democracy initiatives may change the way privacy is viewed in the political process.

More generally, privacy is important in democracy to prevent undue influence. While lack of privacy in the voting process could enable vote buying and coercion, there are more subtle ways of influencing the democratic process, for example through targeted (mis)information campaigns. Online (political) activities of citizens on for example social media facilitate such attempts because of the possibility of targeting through behavioural profiling. Compared to offline political activities, it is more difficult to hide preferences and activities, breaches of confidentiality are more likely, and attempts to influence opinions become more scalable.

Information technology is used for all kinds of surveillance tasks. It can be used to augment and extend traditional surveillance systems such as CCTV and other camera systems, for example to identify specific individuals in crowds, using face recognition techniques, or to monitor specific places for unwanted behaviour. Such approaches become even more powerful when combined with other techniques, such as monitoring of Internet-of-Things devices (Motlagh et al. 2017).

Besides augmenting existing surveillance systems, ICT techniques are nowadays mainly used in the digital domain, typically grouped together under the term “surveillance capitalism” (Zuboff 2019). Social media and other online systems are used to gather large amounts of data about individuals – either “voluntary”, because users subscribe to a specific service (Google, Facebook), or involuntary by gathering all kinds of user related data in a less transparent manner. Data analysis and machine learning techniques are then used to generate prediction models of individual users that can be used, for example, for targeted advertisement, but also for more malicious intents such as fraud or micro-targeting to influence elections (Albright 2016, Other Internet Resources) or referenda such as Brexit (Cadwalladr 2019, Other Internet Resources).

In addition to the private sector surveillance industry, governments form another traditional group that uses surveillance techniques at a large scale, either by intelligence services or law enforcement. These types of surveillance systems are typically justified with an appeal to the “greater good” and protecting citizens, but their use is also controversial. For such systems, one would typically like to ensure that any negative effects on privacy are proportional to the benefits achieved by the technology. Especially since these systems are typically shrouded in secrecy, it is difficult for outsiders to see if such systems are used proportionally, or indeed useful for their tasks (Lawner 2002). This is particularly pressing when governments use private sector data or services for surveillance purposes.

The almost universal use of good encryption techniques in communication systems makes it also harder to gather effective surveillance information, leading to more and more calls for “back doors” that can exclusively be used by government in communication systems. From a privacy standpoint this could be evaluated as unwanted, not only because it gives governments access to private conversations, but also because it lowers the overall security of communication systems that employ this technique (Abelson et al. 2015).

3. How can information technology itself solve privacy concerns?

Whereas information technology is typically seen as the cause of privacy problems, there are also several ways in which information technology can help to solve these problems. There are rules, guidelines or best practices that can be used for designing privacy-preserving systems. Such possibilities range from ethically-informed design methodologies to using encryption to protect personal information from unauthorized use. In particular, methods from the field of information security, aimed at protecting information against unauthorized access, can play a key role in the protection of personal data.

Value sensitive design provides a “theoretically grounded approach to the design of technology that accounts for human values in a principled and comprehensive manner throughout the design process” (Friedman et al. 2006). It provides a set of rules and guidelines for designing a system with a certain value in mind. One such value can be ‘privacy’, and value sensitive design can thus be used as a method to design privacy-friendly IT systems (Van den Hoven et al. 2015). The ‘privacy by design’ approach as advocated by Cavoukian (2009) and others can be regarded as one of the value sensitive design approaches that specifically focuses on privacy (Warnier et al. 2015). More recently, approaches such as “privacy engineering” (Ceross & Simpson 2018) extend the privacy by design approach by aiming to provide a more practical, deployable set of methods by which to achieve system-wide privacy.

The privacy by design approach provides high-level guidelines in the form of principles for designing privacy-preserving systems. These principles have at their core that “data protection needs to be viewed in proactive rather than reactive terms, making privacy by design preventive and not simply remedial” (Cavoukian 2010). Privacy by design’s main point is that data protection should be central in all phases of product life cycles, from initial design to operational use and disposal (see Colesky et al. 2016) for a critical analysis of the privacy by design approach). The Privacy Impact Assessment approach proposed by Clarke (2009) makes a similar point. It proposes “a systematic process for evaluating the potential effects on privacy of a project, initiative or proposed system or scheme” (Clarke 2009). Note that these approaches should not only be seen as auditing approaches, but rather as a means to make privacy awareness and compliance an integral part of the organizational and engineering culture.

There are also several industry guidelines that can be used to design privacy preserving IT systems. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (see PCI DSS v3.2, 2018, in the Other Internet Resources), for example, gives very clear guidelines for privacy and security sensitive systems design in the domain of the credit card industry and its partners (retailers, banks). Various International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards (Hone & Eloff 2002) also serve as a source of best practices and guidelines, especially with respect to information security, for the design of privacy friendly systems. Furthermore, the principles that are formed by the EU Data Protection Directive, which are themselves based on the Fair Information Practices (Gellman 2014) from the early 70s – transparency, purpose, proportionality, access, transfer – are technologically neutral and as such can also be considered as high level ‘design principles’. Systems that are designed with these rules and guidelines in mind should thus – in principle – be in compliance with EU privacy laws and respect the privacy of its users.

The rules and principles described above give high-level guidance for designing privacy-preserving systems, but this does not mean that if these methodologies are followed the resulting IT system will (automatically) be privacy friendly. Some design principles are rather vague and abstract. What does it mean to make a transparent design or to design for proportionality? The principles need to be interpreted and placed in a context when designing a specific system. But different people will interpret the principles differently, which will lead to different design choices, with different effects on privacy. There is also a difference between the design and the implementation of a computer system. During the implementation phase software bugs are introduced, some of which can be exploited to break the system and extract private information. How to implement bug-free computer systems remains an open research question (Hoare 2003). In addition, implementation is another phase wherein choices and interpretations are made: system designs can be implemented in infinitely many ways. Moreover, it is very hard to verify – for anything beyond non-trivial systems – whether an implementation meets its design/specification (Loeckx, Sieber, & Stansifer 1985). This is even more difficult for non-functional requirements such as ‘being privacy preserving’ or security properties in general.

Some specific solutions to privacy problems aim at increasing the level of awareness and consent of the user. These solutions can be seen as an attempt to apply the notion of informed consent to privacy issues with technology (Custers et al. 2018). This is connected to the idea that privacy settings and policies should be explainable to users (Pieters 2011). For example, the Privacy Coach supports customers in making privacy decisions when confronted with RFID tags (Broenink et al. 2010). However, users have only a limited capability of dealing with such choices, and providing too many choices may easily lead to the problem of moral overload (van den Hoven, Lokhorst, & Van de Poel 2012). A technical solution is support for automatic matching of a privacy policy set by the user against policies issued by web sites or apps.

A growing number of software tools are available that provide some form of privacy (usually anonymity) for their users, such tools are commonly known as privacy enhancing technologies (Danezis & Gürses 2010, Other Internet Resources). Examples include communication-anonymizing tools such as Tor (Dingledine, Mathewson, & Syverson 2004) and Freenet (Clarke et al. 2001), and identity-management systems for which many commercial software packages exist (see below). Communication anonymizing tools allow users to anonymously browse the web (with Tor) or anonymously share content (Freenet). They employ a number of cryptographic techniques and security protocols in order to ensure their goal of anonymous communication. Both systems use the property that numerous users use the system at the same time which provides k -anonymity (Sweeney 2002): no individual can be uniquely distinguished from a group of size k , for large values for k . Depending on the system, the value of k can vary between a few hundred to hundreds of thousands. In Tor, messages are encrypted and routed along numerous different computers, thereby obscuring the original sender of the message (and thus providing anonymity). Similarly, in Freenet content is stored in encrypted form from all users of the system. Since users themselves do not have the necessary decryption keys, they do not know what kind of content is stored, by the system, on their own computer. This provides plausible deniability and privacy. The system can at any time retrieve the encrypted content and send it to different Freenet users.

Privacy enhancing technologies also have their downsides. For example, Tor, the tool that allows anonymized communication and browsing over the Internet, is susceptible to an attack whereby, under certain circumstances, the anonymity of the user is no longer guaranteed (Back, Möller, & Stiglic 2001; Evans, Dingledine, & Grothoff 2009). Freenet (and other tools) have similar problems (Douceur 2002). Note that for such attacks to work, an attacker needs to have access to large resources that in practice are only realistic for intelligence agencies of countries. However, there are other risks. Configuring such software tools correctly is difficult for the average user, and when the tools are not correctly configured anonymity of the user is no longer guaranteed. And there is always the risk that the computer on which the privacy-preserving software runs is infected by a Trojan horse (or other digital pest) that monitors all communication and knows the identity of the user.

Another option for providing anonymity is the anonymization of data through special software. Tools exist that remove patient names and reduce age information to intervals: the age 35 is then represented as falling in the range 30–40. The idea behind such anonymization software is that a record can no longer be linked to an individual, while the relevant parts of the data can still be used for scientific or other purposes. The problem here is that it is very hard to anonymize data in such a way that all links with an individual are removed and the resulting anonymized data is still useful for research purposes. Researchers have shown that it is almost always possible to reconstruct links with individuals by using sophisticated statistical methods (Danezis, Diaz, & Troncoso 2007) and by combining multiple databases (Anderson 2008) that contain personal information. Techniques such as k -anonymity might also help to generalize the data enough to make it unfeasible to de-anonymize data (LeFevre et al. 2005).

Cryptography has long been used as a means to protect data, dating back to the Caesar cipher more than two thousand years ago. Modern cryptographic techniques are essential in any IT system that needs to store (and thus protect) personal data, for example by providing secure (confidential) connections for browsing (HTTPS) and networking (VPN). Note however that by itself cryptography does not provide any protection against data breaching; only when applied correctly in a specific context does it become a ‘fence’ around personal data. In addition, cryptographic schemes that become outdated by faster computers or new attacks may pose threats to (long-term) privacy.

Cryptography is a large field, so any description here will be incomplete. The focus will be instead on some newer cryptographic techniques, in particular homomorphic encryption, that have the potential to become very important for processing and searching in personal data.

Various techniques exist for searching through encrypted data (Song et al. 2000, Wang et al. 2016), which provides a form of privacy protection (the data is encrypted) and selective access to sensitive data. One relatively new technique that can be used for designing privacy-preserving systems is ‘homomorphic encryption’ (Gentry 2009, Acar et al. 2018). Homomorphic encryption allows a data processor to process encrypted data, i.e. users could send personal data in encrypted form and get back some useful results – for example, recommendations of movies that online friends like – in encrypted form. The original user can then again decrypt the result and use it without revealing any personal data to the data processor. Homomorphic encryption, for example, could be used to aggregate encrypted data thereby allowing both privacy protection and useful (anonymized) aggregate information. The technique is currently not widely applied; there are serious performance issues if one wants to apply full homomorphic encryption to the large amounts of data stored in today’s systems. However, variants of the original homomorphic encryption scheme are emerging, such as Somewhat Homomorphic Encryption (Badawi et al. 2018), that are showing promise to be more widely applied in practice.

The main idea behind blockchain technology was first described in the seminal paper on Bitcoins (Nakamoto, n.d., Other Internet Resources). A blockchain is basically a distributed ledger that stores transactions in a non-reputable way, without the use of a trusted third party. Cryptography is used to ensure that all transactions are “approved” by members of the blockchain and stored in such a way that they are linked to previous transactions and cannot be removed. Although focused on data integrity and not inherently anonymous, blockchain technology enables many privacy-related applications (Yli-Huumo et al. 2016, Karame and Capkun 2018), such as anonymous cryptocurrency (Narayanan et al. 2016) and self-sovereign identity (see below).

The use and management of user’s online identifiers are crucial in the current Internet and social networks. Online reputations become more and more important, both for users and for companies. In the era of big data correct information about users has an increasing monetary value.

‘Single sign on’ frameworks, provided by independent third parties (OpenID) but also by large companies such as Facebook, Microsoft and Google (Ko et al. 2010), make it easy for users to connect to numerous online services using a single online identity. These online identities are usually directly linked to the real world (off line) identities of individuals; indeed Facebook, Google and others require this form of log on (den Haak 2012). Requiring a direct link between online and ‘real world’ identities is problematic from a privacy perspective, because they allow profiling of users (Benevenuto et al. 2012). Not all users will realize how large the amount of data is that companies gather in this manner, or how easy it is to build a detailed profile of users. Profiling becomes even easier if the profile information is combined with other techniques such as implicit authentication via cookies and tracking cookies (Mayer & Mitchell 2012).

From a privacy perspective a better solution would be the use of attribute-based authentication (Goyal et al. 2006) which allows access of online services based on the attributes of users, for example their friends, nationality, age etc. Depending on the attributes used, they might still be traced back to specific individuals, but this is no longer crucial. In addition, users can no longer be tracked to different services because they can use different attributes to access different services which makes it difficult to trace online identities over multiple transactions, thus providing unlinkability for the user. Recently (Allen 2016, Other Internet Resources), the concept of self-sovereign identity has emerged, which aims for users to have complete ownership and control about their own digital identities. Blockchain technology is used to make it possible for users to control a digital identity without the use of a traditional trusted third party (Baars 2016).

In the previous sections, we have outlined how current technologies may impact privacy, as well as how they may contribute to mitigating undesirable effects. However, there are future and emerging technologies that may have an even more profound impact. Consider for example brain-computer interfaces. In case computers are connected directly to the brain, not only behavioral characteristics are subject to privacy considerations, but even one’s thoughts run the risk of becoming public, with decisions of others being based upon them. In addition, it could become possible to change one’s behavior by means of such technology. Such developments therefore require further consideration of the reasons for protecting privacy. In particular, when brain processes could be influenced from the outside, autonomy would be a value to reconsider to ensure adequate protection.

Apart from evaluating information technology against current moral norms, one also needs to consider the possibility that technological changes influence the norms themselves (Boenink, Swierstra & Stemerding 2010). Technology thus does not only influence privacy by changing the accessibility of information, but also by changing the privacy norms themselves. For example, social networking sites invite users to share more information than they otherwise might. This “oversharing” becomes accepted practice within certain groups. With future and emerging technologies, such influences can also be expected and therefore they ought to be taken into account when trying to mitigate effects.

Another fundamental question is whether, given the future (and even current) level of informational connectivity, it is feasible to protect privacy by trying to hide information from parties who may use it in undesirable ways. Gutwirth & De Hert (2008) argue that it may be more feasible to protect privacy by transparency – by requiring actors to justify decisions made about individuals, thus insisting that decisions are not based on illegitimate information. This approach comes with its own problems, as it might be hard to prove that the wrong information was used for a decision. Still, it may well happen that citizens, in turn, start data collection on those who collect data about them, e.g. governments. Such “counter(sur)veillance” may be used to gather information about the use of information, thereby improving accountability (Gürses et al. 2016). The open source movement may also contribute to transparency of data processing. In this context, transparency can be seen as a pro-ethical condition contributing to privacy (Turilli & Floridi 2009).

It has been argued that the precautionary principle, well known in environmental ethics, might have a role in dealing with emerging information technologies as well (Pieters & van Cleeff 2009; Som, Hilty & Köhler 2009). The principle would see to it that the burden of proof for absence of irreversible effects of information technology on society, e.g. in terms of power relations and equality, would lie with those advocating the new technology. Precaution, in this sense, could then be used to impose restrictions at a regulatory level, in combination with or as an alternative to empowering users, thereby potentially contributing to the prevention of informational overload on the user side. Apart from general debates about the desirable and undesirable features of the precautionary principle, challenges to it lie in its translation to social effects and social sustainability, as well as to its application to consequences induced by intentional actions of agents. Whereas the occurrence of natural threats or accidents is probabilistic in nature, those who are interested in improper use of information behave strategically, requiring a different approach to risk (i.e. security as opposed to safety). In addition, proponents of precaution will need to balance it with other important principles, viz., of informed consent and autonomy.

Finally, it is appropriate to note that not all social effects of information technology concern privacy (Pieters 2017). Examples include the effects of social network sites on friendship, and the verifiability of results of electronic elections. Therefore, value-sensitive design approaches and impact assessments of information technology should not focus on privacy only, since information technology affects many other values as well.

Abelson, H., Anderson, R., Bellovin, S. M., Benaloh, J., Blaze, M., Diffie, W., & Rivest, R. L., 2015, “Keys under doormats: mandating insecurity by requiring government access to all data and communications”, Journal of Cybersecurity , 1(1): 69–79.
Acar, A., Aksu, H., Uluagac, A. S., & Conti, M., 2018, “A survey on homomorphic encryption schemes: Theory and implementation”, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 51(4): 79.
Allen, A., 2011, Unpopular Privacy: What Must We Hide? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, R.J., 2008, Security Engineering: A guide to building dependable distributed systems , Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.
Baars, D., 2016, Towards Self-Sovereign Identity using Blockchain Technology , Ph.D. Thesis, University of Twente.
Back, A., U. Möller, & A. Stiglic, 2001, “Traffic analysis attacks and trade-offs in anonymity providing systems”, in Information Hiding , Berlin: Springer, pp. 245–257.
Al Badawi, A., Veeravalli, B., Mun, C. F., & Aung, K. M. M., 2018, “High-performance FV somewhat homomorphic encryption on GPUs: An implementation using CUDA”, IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems , 2: 70–95. doi: 10.13154/tches.v2018.i2.70-95
Bellman, S., E.J. Johnson, & G.L. Lohse, 2001, “On site: to opt-in or opt-out?: it depends on the question”, Communications of the ACM , 44(2): 25–27.
Benevenuto, F., T. Rodrigues, M. Cha, & V. Almeida, 2012, “Characterizing user navigation and interactions in online social networks”, Information Sciences , 195: 1–24.
Blaauw. M.J., 2013, “The Epistemic Account of Privacy”, Episteme , 10(2): 167–177.
Boenink, M., T. Swierstra, & D. Stemerding, 2010, “Anticipating the interaction between technology and morality: a scenario study of experimenting with humans in bionanotechnology”, Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology , 4(2): 1–38. doi:10.2202/1941-6008.1098
Brey, P., 2005, “Freedom and privacy in ambient intelligence”, Ethics and Information Technology , 7(3): 157–166.
Broenink, G., J.H. Hoepman, C.V.T. Hof, R. Van Kranenburg, D. Smits, & T. Wisman, 2010, “The privacy coach: Supporting customer privacy in the internet of things”, arXiv preprint 1001.4459 [ available online ].
Bruynseels, K & M.J van den Hoven, 2015, “How to do Things with personal Big Biodata”, in B. Roessler and D. Mokrokinska (eds.), Social Dimensions of Privacy: Interdisciplinary Perspectives , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 122–40.
Cadwalladr, C., and Graham-Harrison, E., 2018, “The Cambridge analytica files”, The Guardian , 21: 6–7.
Cavoukian, A., 2009, Privacy by Design , Ottowa: Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, Canada. [ Cavoukian 2009 available online (PDF)].
–––, 2010, “Privacy by Design: The Definitive workshop”, Identity in the Information Society , 3(2): 121–126.
Ceross, A., and A. Simpson, 2018, “Rethinking the Proposition of Privacy Engineering”, in Proceedings of New Security Paradigms Workshop (NSPW ’18, Windsor, UK), New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 89–102. doi:10.1145/3285002.3285006
Clarke, R., 2009, “Privacy impact assessment: Its origins and development”, Computer law & security review , 25(2): 123–135.
Clarke, I., O. Sandberg, B. Wiley, & T. Hong, 2001, “Freenet: A distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system”, in Designing Privacy Enhancing Technologies , Berlin: Springer, pp. 46–66.
Colesky, M., J.-H. Hoepman, and C. Hillen, 2016, “A critical analysis of privacy design strategies”, IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops (SPW), first online O4 August 2016, doi:10.1109/SPW.2016.23
Custers, B., et al., 2018, “Consent and privacy”, The Routledge Handbook of the Ethics of Consent , London: Routledge, pp. 247–258.
Dahl, J. Y., & A.R. Sætnan, 2009, “It all happened so slowly: On controlling function creep in forensic DNA databases”, International journal of law, crime and justice , 37(3): 83–103.
Danezis, G., C. Diaz, & C. Troncoso, 2007, “Two-sided statistical disclosure attack”, in Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Privacy enhancing technologies , Berlin: Springer, pp. 30–44.
DeCew, Judith Wagner, 1997, Pursuit of Privacy: Law, Ethics, and the Rise of Technology , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Dechesne, F., M. Warnier, & J. van den Hoven, 2013, “Ethical requirements for reconfigurable sensor technology: a challenge for value sensitive design”, Ethics and Information Technology , 15(3): 173–181.
Delaune, S., S. Kremer, & M. Ryan, 2006, “Coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness in electronic voting”, in the Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop , IEEE Computer Society Press, pages 28–39. [ Delaune et al. 2006 available online ]
Dingledine, R., N. Mathewson, & P. Syverson, 2004, “Tor: The second-generation onion router”, in Proceedings of the 13th conference on USENIX Security Symposium (Volume 13), Berkeley, CA: USENIX Association, pp. 303–320 [ Dingledine et al. 2004 available online (pdf) ]
Douceur, J., 2002, “The Sybil attack”, in Peer-to-peer Systems , Berlin: Springer, pp. 251–260.
Ellison, N. B., 2007, “Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 13(1): 210–230.
Evans, N.S., R. Dingledine, & C. Grothoff, 2009, “A practical congestion attack on Tor using long paths”, in Proceedings of the 18th conference on USENIX security symposium , Berkeley, CA: USENIX Association, pp. 33–50. [ Evans et al. 2009 available online ]
Falgoust, M., 2016, “Data Science and Designing for Privacy”, Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology , 20 (1): 51–68.
Floridi, L., 2008, “Artificial intelligence’s new frontier: Artificial companions and the fourth revolution”, Metaphilosophy , 39(4–5): 651–655.
Friedewald, M. & O. Raabe, 2011, “Ubiquitous computing: An overview of technology impacts”, Telematics and Informatics , 28(2): 55–65.
Friedman, B., P.H. Kahn, Jr, & A. Borning, 2006, “Value sensitive design and information systems”, in Human-computer interaction in management information systems: Foundations , P. Zhang & D. Galletta (eds.), Armonk: M.E. Sharp, 4.
Gentry, C., 2009, “Fully homomorphic encryption using ideal lattices”, in Proceedings of the 41st annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing , ACM, pp. 169–178.
Goyal, V., O. Pandey, A. Sahai, & B. Waters, 2006, “Attribute-based encryption for fine-grained access control of encrypted data”, in Proceedings of the 13th ACM conference on Computer and communications security , ACM, pp. 89–98.
Gürses, S., A. Kundnani, & J. Van Hoboken, 2016, “Crypto and empire: the contradictions of counter-surveillance advocacy”, Media, Culture & Society , 38(4): 576–590.
Gutwirth, S. & P. De Hert, 2008, “Regulating profiling in a democratic constitutional state”, in Hildebrandt and Gutwirth 2008: 271–302.
den Haak, B., 2012, “Integrating user customization and authentication: the identity crisis”, Security & Privacy, IEEE , 10(5): 82–85.
Heersmink, R., J. van den Hoven, N.J. van Eck, & J. van den Berg, 2011. “Bibliometric mapping of computer and information ethics”, Ethics and information technology , 13(3): 241–249.
Hildebrandt, M., 2008, “Defining Profiling: A New Type of Knowledge?” in Hildebrandt and Gutwirth 2008: 17–45.
Hildebrandt, M. & S. Gutwirth (eds.), 2008, Profiling the European Citizen: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives , Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Hoare, T., 2003, “The verifying compiler: A grand challenge for computing research”, in Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Compiler construction , Berlin: Springer, pp. 262–272.
Hone, K. & J.H.P. Eloff, 2002, “Information security policy – what do international information security standards say?”, Computers & Security , 21(5): 402–409.
van den Hoven, J., 1999, “Privacy and the Varieties of Informational Wrongdoing”, Australian Journal of Professional and Applied Ethics , 1(1): 30–44.
–––, 2008, “Information technology, privacy, and the protection of personal data”, in Information technology and moral philosophy , J. Van Den Hoven and J. Weckert (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 301–322.
van den Hoven, J., G.J. Lokhorst, & I. Van de Poel, 2012, “Engineering and the problem of moral overload”, Science and engineering ethics , 18(1): 143–155.
van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, P., & Van de Poel, I. (eds.), 2015, Handbook of Ethics, Values and Technological Design , Dordrecht: Springer.
Karame, G., and Capkun, S., 2018, “Blockchain Security and Privacy”, IEEE Security Privacy , 16(4), 11–12.
Ko, M.N., G.P. Cheek, M. Shehab, & R. Sandhu, 2010, “Social-networks connect services”, Computer , 43(8): 37–43.
Krishnamurthy, B. & C.E. Wills, 2009. “On the leakage of personally identifiable information via online social networks”, in Proceedings of the 2nd ACM workshop on Online social networks , ACM, pp. 7–12.
Lawner, K. J., 2002, “Post-September 11th International Surveillance Activity – A Failure of Intelligence: The Echelon Interception System & (and) the Fundamental Right to Privacy in Europe”, Pace International Law Review , 14(2): 435–480.
Leenes, R., and E. Kosta, 2015, “Taming the cookie monster with dutch law-a tale of regulatory failure”, Computer Law & Security Review 31(3): 317–335.
LeFevre, K., D.J. DeWitt, & R. Ramakrishnan, 2005, “Incognito: Efficient full-domain k-anonymity”, in Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data , ACM, pp. 49–60.
Lessig, Lawrence, 1999, Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace , New York: Basic Books.
Loeckx, J., K. Sieber, & R.D. Stansifer, 1985, The foundations of program verification , Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Matheson, David, 2007, “Unknowableness and Informational Privacy”, Journal of Philosophical Research , 32: 251–67.
Mayer, J.R. & J.C. Mitchell, 2012, “Third-party web tracking: Policy and technology”, in Security and Privacy (SP) 2012 IEEE Symposium on , IEEE, pp. 413–427.
Michener, J., 1999, “System insecurity in the Internet age”, Software , IEEE, 16(4): 62–69.
Motlagh, N. H., Bagaa, M., & Taleb, T., 2017, “UAV-based IoT platform: A crowd surveillance use case”, IEEE Communications Magazine , 55(2): 128–134.
Nissenbaum, Helen, 2004, “Privacy as Contextual Integrity”, Washington Law Review , 79: 101–139.
Narayanan, A., Bonneau, J., Felten, E., Miller, A., & Goldfeder, S., 2016, Bitcoin and cryptocurrency technologies: a comprehensive introduction , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Negley, G., 1966, “Philosophical Views on the Value of Privacy”, Law and Contemporary Problems , 31: 319–325.
OECD, 1980 [2013], The OECD Privacy Framework , 2013, available in PDF ; revised and expanded from the original Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data , Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, [ 1980 version available online ]
Palmer, D.E., 2005, “Pop-ups, cookies, and spam: toward a deeper analysis of the ethical significance of internet marketing practices”, Journal of business ethics , 58(1–3): 271–280.
Pieters, W., 2011, “Explanation and trust: what to tell the user in security and AI?”, Ethics and information technology , 13(1): 53–64.
–––, 2013, “On thinging things and serving services: technological mediation and inseparable goods”, Ethics and information technology , 15(3): 195–208.
–––, 2017, “Beyond individual-centric privacy: Information technology in social systems” The Information Society , 33(5): 271–281.
Pieters, W. & A. van Cleeff, 2009, “The precautionary principle in a world of digital dependencies”, Computer , 42(6): 50–56.
Rössler, Beate (ed.), 2004, Privacies: Philosophical Evaluations , Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Rössler, Beate, 2005, The value of privacy , Cambridge: Polity Press.
–––, 2001 [2005], The Value of Privacy , Cambridge: Polity Press; original German version Der Wert des Privaten , Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 2001.
Rubel, Alan, 2011, “The Particularized Judgment Account of Privacy”, Res Publica , 17(3): 275–90.
Ruiter, J. & M. Warnier, 2011, “Privacy Regulations for Cloud Computing: Compliance and Implementation in Theory and Practice”, in Computers, Privacy and Data Protection: an Element of Choice , S. Gutwirth, Y. Poullet, P. De Hert, and R. Leenes (eds.), Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 361–376.
Solove, D., 2006, “A Taxonomy of Privacy”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review , 154: 477–564.
Som, C., L.M. Hilty, & A.R. Köhler, 2009, “The precautionary principle as a framework for a sustainable information society”, Journal of business ethics , 85(3): 493–505.
Song, D.X., D. Wagner, & A. Perrig, 2000, “Practical techniques for searches on encrypted data”, in Security and Privacy, 2000. S&P 2000. Proceedings. 2000 IEEE Symposium on , IEEE, pp. 44–55.
Sprenger, Polly, 1999, “Sun on Privacy: ‘Get Over It’”, Wired . [ Sprenger 1999 available online ]
Sweeney, L., 2002, “K-anonymity: A model for protecting privacy”, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems , 10(05): 557–570.
Tavani, H.T., 2004, “Genomic research and data-mining technology: Implications for personal privacy and informed consent”, Ethics and information technology , 6(1): 15–28.
Taylor, L., L. Floridi, and B. Van der Sloot (eds.), 2017, Group privacy: New challenges of data technologies (Philosophical Studies Series: Vol. 126), Dordrecht: Springer.
Thomson, Judith Jarvis, 1975, “The Right to Privacy”, Philosophy and Public Affairs , 4: 295–314.
Turilli, M. & L. Floridi, 2009, “The ethics of information transparency”, Ethics and Information Technology , 11(2): 105–112.
Wang, Y., Wang, J., and Chen, X., 2016, “Secure searchable encryption: a survey”, Journal of Communications and Information Networks , 1(4): 52–65.
Warnier, M., Dechesne, F., and Brazier, F.M.T., 2015, “Design for the Value of Privacy”, in J. van den Hoven, P. Vermaas, I. van de Poel (eds.), Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design , Dordrecht: Springer, 431–445.
Warren, Samuel D. & Louis D. Brandeis, 1890, “The Right to Privacy”, Harvard Law Review , 4(5): 193–220. [ Warren and Brandeis 1890 available online ]
Westin, Alan F., 1967, Privacy and Freedom , New York: Atheneum.
Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., and Smolander, K., 2016, “Where is current research on blockchain technology? – a systematic review”, PloS One , 11(10): e0163477. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163477
Zuboff, S., 2019, The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for the future at the new frontier of power , London: Profile Books.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

Albright, J., 2016, “ How Trump’s campaign used the new data-industrial complex to win the election ”, LSE, US Centre, USApp-American Politics and Policy Blog.
Allen, C., 2016, The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity , Coindesk.
Cadwalladr, C., 2019, Facebook’s role in Brexit – and the threat to democracy . TED Talk
Danezis, G & S. Gürses, 2010, “ A critical review of 10 years of Privacy Technology .”
Gellman, R., 2014, “ Fair information practices: a basic history ,”, Version 2.12, August 3, 2014, online manuscript.
Nakamoto, S., Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System , www.bitcoin.org.
PCI DSS (= Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard), v3.2 (2018), PCI DSS related documents , PCI Security Standards Council, LLC.
Richter, H., W. Mostowski, & E. Poll, 2008, “ Fingerprinting passports ”, presented at NLUUG Spring Conference on Security.
Electronic Privacy Information Center .
European Commission, Data protection .
US Department of State, Privacy Act .

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Information

Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

Active Journals
Find a Journal
Journal Proposal
Proceedings Series
For Authors
For Reviewers
For Editors
For Librarians
For Publishers
For Societies
For Conference Organizers
Open Access Policy
Institutional Open Access Program
Special Issues Guidelines
Editorial Process
Research and Publication Ethics
Article Processing Charges
Testimonials
Preprints.org
SciProfiles
Encyclopedia

Article Menu

Subscribe SciFeed
Recommended Articles
Google Scholar
on Google Scholar
Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Blockchain-based privacy preservation for the internet of medical things: a literature review.

1. Introduction

2. background, 2.1. internet of medical things (iomt), 2.1.1. iomt security, 2.1.2. iomt data privacy.

The right to know what data are being collected about them: Patients should be informed about the types of data that are being collected by IoT healthcare devices and systems, and how these data are being used.
The right to consent to the collection and use of their data: Patients should have the ability to consent to or refuse the collection and use of their data. This consent should be informed and freely given.
The right to access and correct their data: Patients should have the right to access their data and to correct any errors in those data.
The right to restrict the processing of their data: Patients should have the right to restrict the processing of their data, such as by requesting that their data not be shared with third parties.
The right to data portability: Patients should have the right to receive their data in a structured, commonly used, and machine-readable format, and to have these data transferred to another device.
The right to erasure of their data: Patients should have the right to have their data erased in certain circumstances, such as when the data are no longer necessary for the purposes for which they were collected or processed.

2.2. Blockchain

2.2.1. blockchains in healthcare, 3. methodology, 4. related works, 4.1. permissioned blockchains, 4.2. permissionless blockchain, 4.3. empirical studies, 5. discussion, 6. future directions, 7. conclusions, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

Global Smart Healthcare Market—Industry Trends and Forecast to 2029. 2022. Available online: https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/reports/global-smart-healthcare-market (accessed on 23 July 2024).
Statistical Yearbook 2021. 2021. Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Ministry/Statistics/book/Documents/Statistical-Yearbook-2021.pdf (accessed on 12 August 2024).
Schneider, P.; Xhafa, F. Anomaly Detection and Complex Event Processing over IoT Data Streams ; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Smart Hospital Market Value to Reach $ 59 Billion Globally by 2026. Juniper Research. Available online: https://www.juniperresearch.com/press/smart-hospital-market-value-to-reach-59-billion/ (accessed on 6 August 2024).
Medical Device Cybersecurity Regional Preparedness Response Playbook. 2022. Available online: https://www.mitre.org/sites/default/files/2022-11/pr-2022-3616-medical-device-cybersecurity-regional-preparedness-response-companion-guide.pdf (accessed on 23 May 2024).
Vaiyapuri, T.; Binbusayyis, A.; Varadarajan, V. Security, Privacy and Trust in IOMT Enabled Smart Healthcare System: A Systematic Review of current and Future Trends. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 2021 , 12 , 731–737. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Vadapalli, R. Blockchain Fundamentals Textbook Fundamentals of Blockchain ; 2022; Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366928441_BLOCKCHAIN_FUNDAMENTALS_TEXT_BOOK_Blockchain_Fundamentals (accessed on 5 August 2024).
Ahamad, S.S.; Pathan, A.-S.K. A formally verified authentication protocol in secure framework for mobile healthcare during COVID-19-like pandemic. Connect. Sci. 2020 , 33 , 532–554. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ghubaish, A.; Salman, T.; Zolanvari, M.; Unal, D.; Al-Ali, A.; Jain, R. Recent advances in the Internet-of-Medical-Things (IOMT) systems security. IEEE Internet Things J. 2021 , 8 , 8707–8718. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Joung, Y.-H. Development of implantable medical devices: From an engineering perspective. Int. Neurourol. J. 2013 , 17 , 98. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Alsubaei, F.; Abuhussein, A.; Shandilya, V.; Shiva, S. IOMT-SAF: Internet of Medical Things Security Assessment Framework. Internet Things 2019 , 8 , 100123. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Hameed, S.; Khan, F.I.; Hameed, B. Understanding security requirements and Challenges in Internet of Things (IoT): A review. J. Comput. Netw. Commun. 2019 , 2019 , 1–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sengupta, J.; Ruj, S.; Bit, S.D. A comprehensive survey on attacks, security issues and blockchain solutions for IoT and IIoT. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2020 , 149 , 102481. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Hireche, R.; Mansouri, H.; Pathan, A.-S.K. Security and Privacy Management in Internet of Medical Things (IOMT): A synthesis. J. Cybersecur. Priv. 2022 , 2 , 640–661. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Privacy Policy. World Health Organization (WHO). Available online: https://www.who.int/about/policies/privacy (accessed on 11 May 2024).
Personal Data Protection Law. SDAIA. 2023. Available online: https://sdaia.gov.sa/en/SDAIA/about/Documents/Personal%20Data%20English%20V2-23April2023-%20Reviewed-.pdf (accessed on 23 June 2023).
Abideen, S. Blockchain E-Book; Cybrosys Technologies: Kerala, India. Available online: https://assets.website-files.com/622c09eb9c589f58e1ea86da/624b5f643eed1a7a51f05a36_Insight-Into-The-World-Of-Blockchain-By-Cybrosys-Technologies.pdf (accessed on 5 August 2024).
Laurence, T. Blockchain for Dummies ; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
Syed, T.A.; Alzahrani, A.; Jan, S.; Siddiqui, M.S.; Nadeem, A.; Alghamdi, T.G. A Comparative Analysis of Blockchain Architecture and its Applications: Problems and Recommendations. IEEE Access 2019 , 7 , 176838–176869. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jolfaei, A.A.; Aghili, S.F.; Singelee, D. A survey on Blockchain-Based IOMT Systems: Towards Scalability. IEEE Access 2021 , 9 , 148948–148975. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Azbeg, K.; Ouchetto, O.; Andaloussi, S.J. BlockMedCare: A healthcare system based on IoT, Blockchain and IPFS for data management security. Egypt. Inform. J. 2022 , 23 , 329–343. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Arsene, C. The Global ‘Blockchain in Healthcare’ Report: The 2022 Ultimate Guide for Every Executive. Healthcare Weekly. 2 January 2024. Available online: https://healthcareweekly.com/blockchain-in-healthcare-guide/ (accessed on 5 August 2024).
Mani, V.; Manickam, P.; Alotaibi, Y.; Alghamdi, S.; Khalaf, O.I. Hyperledger Healthchain: Patient-Centric IPFS-Based storage of health records. Electronics 2021 , 10 , 3003. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Majdoubi, D.E.; Bakkali, H.E.; Sadki, S. SmartMedChain: A Blockchain-Based Privacy-Preserving smart healthcare framework. J. Healthc. Eng. 2021 , 2021 , 1–19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kumar, R.; Tripathi, R. Towards design and implementation of security and privacy framework for Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) by leveraging blockchain and IPFS technology. J. Supercomput. 2021 , 77 , 7916–7955. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Hai, T.; Sarkar, A.; Aksoy, M.; Karmakar, R.; Manna, S.; Prasad, A. Elevating security and disease forecasting in smart healthcare through artificial neural synchronized federated learning. Clust. Comput. 2024 , 27 , 7889–7914. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jia, X.; Luo, M.; Wang, H.; Shen, J.; He, D. A Blockchain-Assisted Privacy-Aware authentication scheme for internet of medical things. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022 , 9 , 21838–21850. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Rafique, W.; Khan, M.; Khan, S.; Ally, J.S. SecureMed: A Blockchain-Based Privacy-Preserving framework for internet of medical things. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2023 , 2023 , 1–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Qu, Z.; Meng, Y.; Liu, B.; Muhammad, G.; Tiwari, P. QB-IMD: A secure medical data processing system with privacy protection based on quantum blockchain for IOMT. IEEE Internet Things J. 2024 , 11 , 40–49. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Li, C.; Dong, M.; Xin, X.; Li, J.; Chen, X.-B.; Ota, K. Efficient privacy preserving in IOMT with blockchain and lightweight secret sharing. IEEE Internet Things J. 2023 , 10 , 22051–22064. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Qathrady, M.A.; Saeed, M.; Amin, R.; Alshehri, M.S.; Alshehri, A.; Alqhtani, S.M. Smart Healthcare: A dynamic blockchain-based trust management model using Subarray algorithm. IEEE Access 2024 , 12 , 49449–49463. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Xu, J.; Xue, K.; Li, S.; Tian, H.; Hong, J.; Hong, P.; Yu, N. Healthchain: A Blockchain-Based privacy Preserving scheme for Large-Scale Health data. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019 , 6 , 8770–8781. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wang, W.; Wang, L.; Zhang, P.; Xu, S.; Fu, K.; Song, L.; Hu, S. A privacy protection scheme for telemedicine diagnosis based on double blockchain. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2021 , 61 , 102845. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Shankar, K.; Lakshmanaprabu, S.K. Optimal key based homomorphic encryption for color image security aid of ant lion optimization algorithm. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018 , 7a , 22. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Dwivedi, A.; Srivastava, G.; Dhar, S.; Singh, R. A decentralized Privacy-Preserving healthcare blockchain for IoT. Sensors 2019 , 19 , 326. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Wazid, M.; Gope, P. BACKM-EHA: A novel blockchain-enabled security solution for IOMT-based e-healthcare applications. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 2023 , 23 , 39. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Pavithran, D.; Shibu, C.; Madathiparambil, S. Enhancing Trust between Patient and Hospital using Blockchain based architecture with IoMT. Int. J. Comput. Digit. Syst. 2024 , 15 , 295–303. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Azaria, A.; Ekblaw, A.; Vieira, T.; Lippman, A. MEDREC: Using blockchain for medical data access and permission management. In Proceedings of the 2016 2nd International Conference on Open and Big Data (OBD), Vienna, Austria, 22–24 August 2016. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Liang, X.; Zhao, J.; Shetty, S.; Liu, J.; Li, D. Integrating blockchain for data sharing and collaboration in mobile healthcare applications. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (IEEE PIMRC 2017), Montreal, QC, Canada, 8–13 October 2017. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Haque, R.U.; Hasan, A.S.M.T.; Nishat, T.; Adnan, M.A. Privacy-Preserving k-Means Clustering over Blockchain-Based Encrypted IoMT Data. In Internet of Things ; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 109–123. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Nie, X.; Zhang, A.; Chen, J.; Qu, Y.; Yu, S. Blockchain-Empowered secure and Privacy-Preserving health data sharing in Edge-Based IOMT. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2022 , 2022 , 1–16. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ranjith, J.; Mahantesh, K. Blockchain-based knapsack system for security and privacy preserving to medical data. SN Comput. Sci. 2021 , 2 , 2608–2617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Verma, G. Blockchain-based privacy preservation framework for healthcare data in cloud environment. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 2022 , 36 , 147–160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sharma, P.; Namasudra, S.; Chilamkurti, N.; Kim, B.-G.; Crespo, R.G. Blockchain-Based privacy preservation for IoT-Enabled healthcare system. ACM Trans. Sens. Netw. 2023 , 19 , 56. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wang, M.; Zhang, H.; Wu, H.; Li, G.; Gai, K. Blockchain-Based Secure Medical Data Management and Disease Prediction. In Proceedings of the ASIA CCS ’22: ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Nagasaki, Japan, 30 May–3 June 2022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Guduri, M.; Chakraborty, C.; Maheswari, U.V.; Margala, M. Blockchain-based federated learning technique for privacy preservation and security of smart electronic health records. IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. 2023 , 70 , 2608–2617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Miao, J.; Wang, Z.; Wu, Z.; Ning, X.; Tiwari, P. A blockchain-enabled privacy-preserving authentication management protocol for Internet of Medical Things. Expert Syst. Appl. 2024 , 237 , 121329. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lin, Q.; Li, X.; Cai, K.; Prakash, M.; Paulraj, D. Secure Internet of medical Things (IoMT) based on ECMQV-MAC authentication protocol and EKMC-SCP blockchain networking. Inf. Sci. 2024 , 654 , 119783. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kanneboina, A.; Sundaram, G. Improving security performance of Internet of Medical Things using hybrid metaheuristic model. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Chaturvedi, N.S. Iot-Based Secure Healthcare Framework Using Blockchain Technology with A Novel Simplified Swarm-Optimized Bayesian Normalized Neural Networks. Int. J. Data Inform. Intell. Comput. 2023 , 2 , 63–71. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Yadav, S.; Yadav, V. A Sustainable Blockchain and Asymmetric Broadcast Encryption-Based Secure E-Healthcare System. In Sustainable Security Practices Using Blockchain, Quantum and Post-Quantum Technologies for Real Time Applications ; Springer: Singapore, 2024; pp. 71–86. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ramesh, V.; Glass, R.L.; Vessey, I. Research in computer science: An empirical study. J. Syst. Softw. 2004 , 70 , 165–176. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Makhdoom, I.; Zhou, I.; Abolhasan, M.; Lipman, J.; Ni, W. PrivySharing: A blockchain-based framework for integrity and privacy-preserving data sharing in smart cities. Comput. Secur. 2019 , 1 , 363–371. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Tanwar, S.; Bhatia, Q.; Patel, P.; Kumari, A.; Singh, P.K.; Hong, W.-C. Machine Learning adoption in Blockchain-Based Smart Applications: The challenges, and a way forward. IEEE Access 2020 , 8 , 474–488. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Panarello, A.; Tapas, N.; Merlino, G.; Longo, F.; Puliafito, A. Blockchain and IoT Integration: A Systematic survey. Sensors 2018 , 18 , 2575. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Salman, T.; Zolanvari, M.; Erbad, A.; Jain, R.; Samaka, M. Security Services Using Blockchains: A State of the art survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2019 , 21 , 858–880. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Phan, N.T.C.; Tran, N.H.C. Consideration of data security and privacy using machine learning techniques. Int. J. Data Inform. Intell. Comput. 2023 , 2 , 20–32. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Primary Studies	Year	Blockchain Platform	Cryptography Algorithm	Data Storage	Security Considerations ( )
[ ]	2021	Hyperledger fabric	Asymmetric	Off-chain	Privacy, integrity, confidentiality
[ ]	2021	Hyperledger fabric	AES	Off-chain	Privacy, integrity, non-repudiation
[ ]	2021	Consortium blockchain	ECDSA	Off-chain	Authentication, integrity, privacy
[ ]	2022	Hyperledger fabric	Elliptic curve cryptography (ECC)	Off-chain	Authentication, privacy
[ ]	2023	Pythereum	ECDSA	Off-chain	Authentication, privacy
[ ]	2023	Quantum blockchain	Quantum cryptography	On-chain	Confidentiality, authentication, privacy
[ ]	2023	Hyperledger fabric	Not specified	Off-chain	Confidentiality, privacy
[ ]	2024	Hybrid	Not specified	Off-chain	Integrity, privacy
[ ]	2024	Not specified	Not specified	On-chain	Authentication, privacy

Primary Studies	Year	Blockchain Platform	Cryptography Algorithm	Data Storage	Security Considerations ( )
[ ]	2019	Not specified	SHA-256, AES, RSA, RSA signing	Off-chain	Privacy, non-repudiation
[ ]	2019	Not specified	ARX ciphers	Off-chain	Privacy, confidentiality, authentication, integrity
[ ]	2021	Not specified	128-bit AES, 1024-bit RSA	Off-chain	Privacy
[ ]	2021	Not specified	Merkle–Hellman knapsack	On-chain	Privacy
[ ]	2022	Not specified	Elliptic curve cryptography (ECC)	Off-chain	Privacy
[ ]	2022	Ethereum	Umbral threshold proxy re-encryption scheme	Off-chain	Confidentiality, integrity, privacy
[ ]	2022	Not specified	Paillier homomorphic	On-chain	Privacy
[ ]	2022	Ethereum	KP-ABE	On-chain	Privacy
[ ]	2022	Not specified	Blowfish	Off-chain	Authentication, integrity, privacy
[ ]	2022	Not specified	Digital signatures	Hybrid	Confidentiality, integrity, privacy
[ ]	2023	Ethereum	Not specified	On-chain	Authentication, confidentiality, availability, integrity, privacy
[ ]	2023	Ethereum	Re-encryption with federated learning	Off-chain	Integrity, privacy
[ ]	2023	Not specified	HVE-NIS algorithm	Off-chain	Integrity, privacy
[ ]	2024	Ethereum	Elliptic curve cryptography (ECC)	Off-chain	Integrity, privacy
[ ]	2024	Not specified	Chebyshev chaotic map	Off-chain	Authentication, privacy
[ ]	2024	Not specified	Deltoid curve-based Pallier cryptosystem (DC-PC)	Off-chain	Authentication, privacy
[ ]	2024	Not specified	Elliptic curve cryptography (ECC)	Off-chain	Integrity, privacy
[ ]	2024	Not specified	Asymmetric key-based broadcast	Off-chain	Authentication, privacy

The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

Alsadhan, A.; Alhogail, A.; Alsalamah, H. Blockchain-Based Privacy Preservation for the Internet of Medical Things: A Literature Review. Electronics 2024 , 13 , 3832. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13193832

Alsadhan A, Alhogail A, Alsalamah H. Blockchain-Based Privacy Preservation for the Internet of Medical Things: A Literature Review. Electronics . 2024; 13(19):3832. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13193832

Alsadhan, Afnan, Areej Alhogail, and Hessah Alsalamah. 2024. "Blockchain-Based Privacy Preservation for the Internet of Medical Things: A Literature Review" Electronics 13, no. 19: 3832. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13193832

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

COMMENTS

The Importance of Internet Privacy: [Essay Example], 1017 words
Get custom essay. Ultimately, the importance of internet privacy extends beyond individual convenience; it is a fundamental right that underpins our freedom, security, and individuality in the digital age. By recognizing the significance of internet privacy and taking meaningful steps to protect it, we can ensure that the digital landscape ...
Why Security and Privacy Matter in a Digital World
One cannot pick up a newspaper, watch TV, listen to the radio, or scan the news on the internet without some direct or veiled reference to the lack of information security or intrusions into personal privacy. Many intrusions into government and private-sector systems have exposed sensitive mission, business and personal information.
Privacy matters because it empowers us all
Power over others' privacy is the quintessential kind of power in the digital age. T wo years after it was funded and despite its popularity, Google still hadn't developed a sustainable business model. In that sense, it was just another unprofitable internet startup. Then, in 2000, Google launched AdWords, thereby starting the data economy.
Essay on Internet Privacy
Internet privacy is a subcategory of data privacy, focusing on the protection of user information shared online. It is a significant concern in the digital age, where data is considered the new oil. Internet privacy concerns the safeguarding of personal, financial, and data information of a private individual or organization.
Essays on Internet Privacy
When writing an essay on internet privacy, it is important to research and gather relevant information from credible sources. This may include academic journals, government reports, and reputable news outlets. It is also important to consider different perspectives and arguments on the topic to provide a well-rounded and comprehensive analysis.
61 Internet Privacy Essay Topic Ideas & Examples
Perhaps the most troubling applications of the internet in current times are the mass surveillance efforts by the US government. The internet age has dramatically increased the ability of government to engage in surveillance. We will write a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts. 189 writers online.
Speech on Internet Privacy
Internet privacy is a complicated topic that encompasses how your personal information is utilized, gathered, shared, and kept on your own devices and when connected to the Internet. Personal information about your habits, purchasing, and location can be gathered and shared with third parties via your phone, GPS, and other devices.
The Importance Of Internet Privacy
Internet privacy is the security of a user's personal data that is stored or published on the internet. The internet is an important part of every individual's daily life. In today's society, the internet is used by many different people for many reasons. It can be used for research, communication, and purchasing items.
The Importance Of Internet Privacy
Internet privacy is the security of a user's personal data that is stored or published on the internet. The internet is an important part of every individual's daily life. In today's society, the internet is used by many different people for many reasons. It can be used for research, communication, and purchasing items.
Essay on Data Privacy
This essay on data privacy is a simple explanation of a complex issue, and it's important for everyone, including school students, to understand it. As we use the internet more and more, understanding data privacy will become even more important. So, let's all make an effort to keep our personal data safe. That's it! I hope the essay ...
Essay on Importance of Internet in 150, 200, 300 Words
Tips to Write the Perfect Essay on Internet. Sample 1 of Essay on the Importance of the Internet (100 Words) Sample Essay 2 - Importance of the Internet (150 Words) Sample Essay 3 on Use of Internet for Student (300 Words) FAQs. Uses of the Internet in Daily Life. Also Read: Essay on Yoga Day.
The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy
Essay Example: Digital Evolution: The Internet's Global Reach, Power, and Potential Risks The Internet has been around for about 20-plus years. In its time, it has evolved into this enormous commodity that everyone now uses. The Internet has given us many different things with just a click of
Privacy in the Digital Age
Anonymity and the Internet. For many people, anonymity is one of the biggest worries as far as using the Internet is concerned. The virtual world may make it easier for dissidents to criticize governments, for alcoholics to talk about their problems and for shy people to find love. However, anonymity also creates room for dishonest people to ...
What Is Digital Privacy and Its Importance?
Digital privacy, a subset of the broader concept of privacy, focuses on the proper handling and usage of sensitive data—specifically personal information, communication, and conduct—that are generated and transmitted within digital environments. In essence, it denotes the rights and expectations of individuals to keep personal information ...
10 Reasons Why Privacy Rights are Important
The right to privacy is a enshrined in article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), article 17 in the legally binding International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and in article 16 of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC). Many national constitutions and human rights documents mention the […]
Internet privacy
Internet and digital privacy are viewed differently from traditional expectations of privacy. Internet privacy is primarily concerned with protecting user information. Law Professor Jerry Kang explains that the term privacy expresses space, decision, and information. [10] In terms of space, individuals have an expectation that their physical spaces (e.g. homes, cars) not be intruded.
Why We Care about Privacy
To lose control of one's personal information is in some measure to lose control of one's life and one's dignity. Therefore, even if privacy is not in itself a fundamental right, it is necessary to protect other fundamental rights. In what follows we will consider the most important arguments in favor of privacy.
The Importance Of Internet Privacy
Internet privacy is the security of a user's personal data that is stored or published on the internet. The internet is an important part of every individual's daily life. In today's society, the internet is used by many different people for many reasons. It can be used for research, communication, and purchasing items.
The Importance of Internet Privacy and Net Neutrality to Internet Users
According to Techopedia, internet privacy is protection provided for the data published online by individuals through the internet. Net neutrality, on the other hand, is an internet principle that prevents internet service providers from influencing communication through the internet.
The Importance Of Privacy
The "Nothing-to-Hide Argument" Analyzed: In this rhetorical analysis, I will be taking a look at Daniel J. Solove's essay "The Nothing-to-Hide Argument," which is about privacy in the context of personal information and government data collection (Solove 734).
Privacy and Information Technology
Typically, this involves the use of computers and communication networks. The amount of information that can be stored or processed in an information system depends on the technology used. The capacity of the technology has increased rapidly over the past decades, in accordance with Moore's law.
Exploring Motivations for Online Privacy Protection Behavior: Insights
However, these benefits go together with a risk to people's (informational) privacy. An important aspect of informational privacy is individual control over the collection and dissemination of personal information (Baruh, Secinti, & Cemalcilar, 2017; Nissenbaum, 2009).Having informational privacy means being able to determine for yourself when, how, and to what extent information about you ...
Full article: Online Privacy Breaches, Offline Consequences
Over 30 years ago, Mason (Citation 1986) voiced ethical concerns over the protection of informational privacy, or "the ability of the individual to personally control information about one's self" (Stone et al., Citation 1983), calling it one of the four ethical issues of the information age.Since the 1980s, scholars have remained concerned about informational privacy, especially given ...
Blockchain-Based Privacy Preservation for the Internet of Medical
The Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) is a rapidly expanding network comprising medical devices, sensors, and software that collect and exchange patient health data. Today, the IoMT has the potential to revolutionize healthcare by offering more personalized care to patients and improving the efficiency of healthcare delivery. However, the IoMT also introduces significant privacy concerns ...

Taking Measure

Why Security and Privacy Matter in a Digital World

About the author

Related posts

‌A Summer of Studying Cybersecurity — and Human Error’s Role in Attacks

NIST Research Is Setting the Standard to Help Buildings Withstand Tornadoes

Demystifying Quantum: It’s Here, There and Everywhere

Add new comment

Privacy is power

Essay on Data Privacy

100 Words Essay on Data Privacy

Why is Data Privacy Important?

How to Protect Your Data?

Role of Companies in Data Privacy

250 Words Essay on Data Privacy

How is Data Privacy Protected?

What Can We Do to Protect Our Data Privacy?

500 Words Essay on Data Privacy

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Essay on Importance of Internet: Samples for Students

This Blog Includes:

Nikita Puri

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Connect With Us

Need help with?

Country Preference

Which English test are you planning to take?

When are you planning to take the exam?

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

What is your budget to study abroad?

The Importance of Internet: Benefits, Risks, and Online Privacy

Digital Evolution: The Internet’s Global Reach, Power, and Potential Risks

Online Vulnerabilities: The Thin Line Between Connectivity and Privacy Breaches

Internet Deception: The Dark Side of Digital Identities

Internet Safety: Navigating the Web with Caution and Awareness

Government Oversight and the Vulnerability of the Digital Generation

References:

Cite this page

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Privacy in the Digital Age Essay

Introduction

What Is Digital Privacy and Its Importance?

Introduction to Digital Privacy

Importance of Digital Privacy for Individuals

Cybersecurity and Digital Privacy

Government Surveillance and Digital Privacy

Emerging Technologies and Digital Privacy

10 Reasons Why Privacy Rights are Important

#1. Privacy rights prevent the government from spying on people (without cause)

#2. Privacy rights keep groups from using personal data for their own goals

#3. Privacy rights help ensure those who steal or misuse data are held accountable

#4. Privacy rights help maintain social boundaries

#5. Privacy rights help build trust

#6. Privacy rights ensure we have control over our data

#7. Privacy rights protect freedom of speech and thought

#8. Privacy rights let you engage freely in politics

#9. Privacy rights protect reputations

#10. Privacy rights protect your finances

You may also like

15 Inspiring Quotes for Transgender Day of Visibility

Freedom of Expression 101: Definition, Examples, Limitations

15 Trusted Charities Addressing Child Poverty

12 Trusted Charities Advancing Women’s Rights

13 Facts about Child Labor

Environmental Racism 101: Definition, Examples, Ways to Take Action

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Why We Care about Privacy

The Importance of Internet Privacy and Net Neutrality to Internet Users in The Modern Era

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Bibliography