Encryption and internet privacy: balancing security with individual freedoms

Securing the Electronic Frontier

The paradox of how to secure individuals and organizations' right to access the Internet vs. securing personal and corporate data and identities is a particularly complex and challenging issue. The ethicacy of this paradox is most present in the differences between encryption and Pretty Good Privacy (PGP). Too open of standards and governance policies on these areas will often lead to large scale data breaches, as many organizations presume they have greater security over their data than is actually the case (Mikko, 2010). When security guidelines and initiatives are too restrictive, organizations cannot accomplish their objectives either. Making this paradox complex is the ethicacy of asking people and organizations for passwords and access to their accounts (Spinello, 2004). The ethics of trespass vs. legitimate access becomes all the more critical when the complexity, pace and severity of computer fraud perpetrated by globally-based gangs that are well-financed (Mikko, 2010).

Analyzing the Ethics of the Electronic Frontier

Too many organizations are getting lulled into a state of false complacency due to the security vendors hyping their solutions, and the tendency to believe in their technological superiority (Miller, Tucker, 2011). This is dangerous and is one of the strongest catalysts for global governments increasingly attempting to get password access to user's accounts globally. Crime syndicates and gangs, in addition to unscrupulous marketers all attempt to also gain access to potential customers' account through the use of spam and spiders. Both of these forms of communication are clearly forms of electronic trespass. They violate the ethical boundaries of individual freedoms as defined by Kantian, Utilitarian, and Social Contract Theories (Spinello, 2004). Bots, spiders and spam are also unethical from the standpoint of deliberately changing the context of value exchanged and the intentional misuse of the Internet to defraud and mislead (Spinello, 2011).

Websites are also considered digital property, protected by comparable rights to publications and other forms of artistic and personal expression (Spinello, 2004). A website can be as personal as an artists' canvas, or the words of a writer whose thoughts could bring much needed change to society, as Upton Sinclair did decades ago in several areas including meat processing. These are examples of why the civil liberties of websites must be protected and the ethicacy of an individuals' freedom of speech always considered in any debate over encryption (Spinello, 2011).