I came across this interesting article today that I think you should all read:
There’s much that remains murky about a Justice Department proposal to require Internet companies to retain records detailing their users’ online activities for up to two years. But anyone who uses the Internet — and that’s just about everyone in America — ought to be concerned.
The plan was pushed by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, FBI Director Robert Mueller and other government officials at a recent meeting with executives from AOL, Google, Microsoft and other Internet firms. It would require companies to keep data on searches, e-mail traffic and unspecified details about users’ Web habits for possible use in terrorism and child pornography investigations. It could apply to Internet firms large and small, as well as providers of Internet access, including private employers, hotels, libraries, universities and operators of wireless hotspots.
Any plan would presumably have to be approved by Congress. To date, the Justice Department has not put forward a concrete plan or draft legislation.
Making it easier for law enforcement to catch terrorists and pedophiles is a good thing. But the government’s proposal poses security risks that could outweigh benefits. And it raises serious concerns about privacy, cost and usefulness.
The proposal would require companies to store and make searchable terabytes upon terabytes of data at a cost that no one is able to forecast but that is certain to be huge. How many additional servers would a Yahoo or an AT&T have to keep? What about a mom-and-pop ISP? And who will pay for all of it?
What’s more, these large data troves are certain to become targets of hackers, identity thieves and unscrupulous insiders. As the raft of recent data breaches has shown, there are plenty of companies, organizations and government agencies that do a lousy job at securing data. Forcing them to keep more of it would put everyone at risk.
Perhaps worst of all, the proposal would create a Big Brotherish Internet where everyone’s activities are recorded for future review. Initially, only those investigating terror and child pornography cases would be able to access the data. If history is any guide, other types of crimes would eventually be added. Private litigants in divorce and other civil cases would demand access too. Before long, users could lose trust in the Internet and begin to curtail their online activities.
The government already has the authority to demand that Internet companies keep records on individuals in connection with specific investigations. And so far, law enforcement officials have not made the case why that authority is insufficient. Perhaps they should start there, before trapping all of cyberspace inside a giant net of suspicion.
The government didn’t invent the idea of data retention. Many Internet companies have been tracking and storing the activities of their users for years, giving rise to many of the same privacy concerns, security risks and consumer fears. The government’s data-retention proposal would merely exacerbate them.
To bolster privacy and public trust on the Internet, online firms should consider being much more forthcoming about what personal information they collect and store and how they use it. And as they lobby to deflect new government data-retention mandates, they should also lobby for stronger laws to protect the data they already hold.
The source of this article is: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/14759508.htm
Popularity: 1% [?]