References: | Computer Ethics, Chapter 5 |
Data Protection Act |
To make provision for the protection of individuals against
the violation of their privacy by the processing of personal data and
for matters connected therewith or ancillery thereto.
Data Protection Act, Chapter 440, The Laws of Malta
Why is information important?
Why is privacy important?
Is privacy important because entities (people, corporations, governments, etc.) cannot be trusted to use the information properly? What does using information properly mean? Is this why regulations and legislation are needed - to define proper use of information?
Information is something that has, or is seen to have, value and may have a context in which the information is obtained or used. The value of the information may change depeding on the context in which it is obtained or used. In the context of this lecture if I say "two", then you probably cannot fathom how to make use of it - it appears to have no value; it probably isn't information.
Consider, instead, that again in the context of this lecture, I
state "In the exam, the answer to question 4 is 'two'". Suddenly, that
statement has considerable value. Not only can you use it to you own
advantage (to help you to pass an exam), but you can also perhaps sell
the information to other students who are not at this lecture, but who
will be sitting for the exam. Although a public announcement of the
statement may remove any monetary profit that can be made from
transactions involving the information, those sitting for the exam will
still profit in other ways.
Scenarios
Consider the following scenarios:
In each scenario, the information has been obtained in one context; the information may have value to the entity which obtained the information initially; the information may also have value to third-parties; the information may be traded or simply made available (intentionally, or otherwise) to third-parties; third-parties may obtain the information for use in a context which is different from the one in which it was obtained; you may be advantaged or disadvantaged by the disclosure of information.
Is it a only a problem if the information is "sensitive" (in some way) and can be used against you?
It used to be, when this kind of information was available only stored in paper records, that investigators would have to have a feeling that I was worthy of investigation and then manually track down and analyse the evidence, which may have taken months or even longer. Nowadays, a program can be written to do it - for all citizens, rather than just those who have raised suspicions, and make connections between different pieces of information in a heartbeat! Is it an infringement of our rights if governments performs those sorts of checks on us? What if governments don't, but they do not ensure that the data cannot be accessed by the public (lack of security), and a third-party uses the information to threaten to "expose" the information? What if the third-parties simply e-mail the information to "the rest of the world"? Or publish it on a Web site?
Although paper record-keeping and manual processing of data may have given rise to claims of infringements of privacy, technological advances make it possible for infringements on a scale never seen before. Johnson identifies five ways in which technology has effected record-keeping :
We will now consider how data may be "inverted" to make unwanted connections between different information that exists.
In the sixth scenario above, a company was able to access information about us that perhaps should not have been available to them. You telephoned a company to make enquiries which were unsatisifed, but through Caller ID the company was able to obtain the name and address of the subscriber and was able add the details to a direct marketing database. The company may have also sold this information to other companies that may be in a better position to meet your requirements.
The information that you provide to the telephone company (name, address, telephone number) is automatically included in a telephone directory unless you ask for it to not appear. In its print form, the telephone directory is organised by surname, name, locality, and telephone number. The intention is clearly that it is possible to extract meaningful information (information that has value) if you know the subscriber's name as well as at least a partial address (unless the subscriber name is unique).
In electronic format, however, data can be inverted. Assuming that the information is stored in a database, with the touch of a button the information may be sorted by telephone number, or by partial address (eg, town or street name). The only reason that the company in scenario six is able to identify the subscriber is because a mechanism is available to invert the data so that instead of the only reasonable method of accessing the data is by subscriber name, suddenly it is possible to access all information about subscribers using any part of the record.
The over-riding problem in this example is not so much that the telephone company has a database of its subscribers - the company needs it. The problem (if, indeed, it is a problem!) is that the company has made this database available to the public (or to third-parties in exchange for a fee). The way that the information may be subsequently used may be inconsistent with its intended use when it was given by the subscriber.
Other forms of data inversion may occur through processing of publicly available information, especially when it is on-line and susceptible to electronic data processing techniques. For instance, a current trend on the Web is to create Web robots that capture email addresses. You can potentially build a list of hundred's of millions of email addresses... However, those email addresses are made public so that contact can be established for "legitimate" reasons. They are not there so that junk mail can be sent indiscriminately. If you do that, as more and more people learn of their rights, you can discover that you are actually acting against your own interests. If I receive unsolicited email of a commercial nature, I usually mail back to say "Thank you very much... I've now added their details to my database of companies I will never, ever, do business with!". Just as it is easy for them to contact me, it is even easier for me to boycott them!
In a similar way, if you confess your sins to a priest, get a health check-up, tell your nearest and dearest about the thing that scares you most, discuss your financial situation with your bank manager, or go to the chemist to purchase ointment for an embarrassing skin complaint, you will feel that your trust has been betrayed if all that information appeared in public the next day.
Similarly, when information about ourselves is given to entities as part of an interaction (a company must know your name and address if it is to make a delivery to you; a retail outlet does not need this information, but will have at least your name if you make a purchase using a debit/credit card or cheque; unless you use cash, you cannot be anonymous!), we trust the entity to use the information for that transaction only. The entity rarely throws away the information, however. The entity archives it for processing, to see how trends are developing; to contact you when new stock arrives; to invite you to the launch of a new season; to provide you with a more informed service, tailored to your needs... As in scenario three, there are times when you may feel that you are being provided with a better service as a result of the information being shared and used in different contexts: this is the dilemma of information and privacy! See Johnson, 2001, Chapter 5, pp 118-129) for arguments concerning privacy.
Legislation exists in the legal systems of a number of countries to provide legal frameworks for the obtaining, storing, processing, and sharing of information. We will not be looking at the legal implications of the Data Protection Act (Laws of Malta), but you are encouraged to be familiar with its provisions. If are, or will be, creating collections of information about identifiable individuals (as opposed to collections of information about anonymous people), then you must be aware of your rights as well as the rights of the individuals. If you, for or on behalf of an entity, betray the trust of an individual, then, ultimately you will only be hurting your own reputation and the reputation of your employer. Similarly, as a professional, you have a duty to report possible infringements on civil liberties when you are aware of them.
Date last amended: Tuesday, 4th November 2003