Digitisation Trends and Privacy Concerns
The continuous development of scientific and technological products such as artificial intelligence provides the foundation for the evolution of the digital economy and society, promoting people’s living standards and dramatically improving the pace of production and communication.
It is undeniable that the widespread utilisation of digital techniques has also brought new drawbacks that differ from traditional methods of communication. Although privacy violations are not unique to the era of big data, continuous innovations and breakthroughs in sciences like algorithms and data collection have increased the likelihood of privacy abuses and complicated responses to privacy risks.
In traditional media practice and information exchange, privacy may lose its priority temporarily to realise public interest, and the disclosure crisis can be controlled and restrained effectively (Dwyer, 2013). With numerous instances of personal information trafficking and public concern about precise content delivery rising to the top of the agenda, the digital age’s dilemma of user data and development has deepened, even forming a vicious circle.
As the accessibility of platforms continues to increase, individuals need to sacrifice more and more privacy protection in exchange for the full utilisation of platform features. Meanwhile, applications are optimising and upgrading to request more user information to increase their advertising investment and marketing reach, further violating users’ privacy. Therefore, Individuals are both beneficiaries and victims of market competition and platform profit-making in the process of digital capital expansion.
Privacy is the Shelter of Individual Security
The right to privacy is a fundamental democratic human right recognized by laws or treaties on a global scale. Privacy involves a series of security guarantees necessary for private life, and these details and certifications about a person’s livelihood are essential infrastructures for an individual to survive without disturbing (Warren & Brandeis, 1890). Even in the digital era where communication technology is constantly innovating, it is a crucial right related to personal safety and property security that cannot be violated (Flew, 2021).
Daily contact information such as email, phone, address and other personal messages are the main channels people categorize their social activities. The public can also determine what information is necessary to disclose for socializing at work and distinguish the private sphere from the public space.
Therefore, as a property, privacy autonomy should be fully guaranteed. Individuals should have the right to be informed of the access, disclosure and exploitation of their personal information and the freedom to choose the extent to which they want to share confidential details and determine how the data is processed (Gritzalis, 2004).
Privacy Breaches Continue to Abound Globally
In the digital age, Internet giants are committed to breaking the cage of information to advance the interaction of communication. While data sharing continuously creates economic value and enhances community connectivity, the greater the privacy risk, the stronger the urgency to protect personal information.
As is proposed by the Australian Law Reform Commission (2014), the data processing by the digital platform and the advertising media organization both have the potential to be compromised, possibly due to weaknesses in the website or vulnerabilities in the maintenance of the software.
Many commercial organizations use malicious tactics to collect personal information and user profiles, leading to severe consequences and property damage, even causing extreme cyber scams and hacking attacks, which exacerbates the severity of privacy threats.
Tech and business companies are the hardest hit by privacy risks. The following incidents are the inventory of significant privacy security cases on mainstream applications and large Internet platforms in recent years.
According to the report of Insider in 2021, 533 million users’ information was released to a hacking forum, including account information and basic personal information such as registrants’ names, locations, birthdays, phone numbers and emails, leading to the cloak over private lives being unveiled and exposing the risks of trusting the platform surveillance. The stolen data involved accounts from 106 countries. Although Facebook presented that the records do not cover important information such as finances, medical conditions and passwords, the incident is likely to provide a reference value for other abuses and cybercrimes, which means the oversight of Facebook and their negligence has put a high volume of subscribers in danger circumstance.
Also, this is not the first time Facebook has had a privacy breach. The privacy scandal that occurred in 2018, which is known as Cambridge Analytica Scandal, has brought negative impacts on a global scale. The organisation gathered account data by disguising it as an investigation and analysed the user’s basic life situation and social networks in further steps to quantify their social behaviour, making it easier to control their preferences and trends, and can even influence democratic elections through the transmission of information.
Based on the timeline and response of Facebook covered by NBC News (2018), Facebook still lacks a rigorous attitude towards past privacy issues, and many serious platform vulnerabilities have not been effectively addressed. Although the privacy scandal has cost Facebook an astronomical fine, they still have not fulfilled their obligations as a media platform widely depended on by the public.
OneMoreLead
OneMoreLead is a B2B marketing company that similarly suffered from a data breach in August 2021, affecting 63 million relevant stakeholders because the customer’s private information is stored in a fragile database and lacks sufficient security. Therefore, vpnMentor’s research team said that through these users and their employers, as well as email addresses related to the police department, hackers can easily infiltrate high-level Government agencies, the important confidential information is the basis for the survival of government executive agencies, and will lead to serious national security incidents if it is deliberately used for criminal activities.
Infinity Insurance Advisers also experienced temporary access to insurance service records. It is stated that someone has transiently browsed the files stored on the network server without authorization. Its information includes the social security status of current and past employees, medical details and accident records, which are incredibly significant to individual property and personal safety.
Then, what is the protection of privacy security that the public ignores in daily life situations?
Personal Privacy Rights are Surrendered
Despite the consensus on the significance of privacy and a growing focus on granting various permissions and managing information, many privacy rights remain surrendered to the threat of private information beyond defence. As Francis (2017) illustrated, the privacy paradox demonstrates the tension between individual access to online services and the availability of data processing by digital platforms; thus, people tend to reveal more personal information to access online products because they have no other choice.
Firstly, the users have intentionally or invisibly ceded their rights in order to obtain some software or applications to some extent. For instance, many websites and social media platforms like WeChat require a cell phone number when registering for membership. The first step that WeChat subscribers can generally use this software to chat and communicate is to provide a valid phone number to receive authentication and verification code collection. Still, in WeChat’s privacy policy, this operation is characterized as user-initiated information. These terms make people feel very irrational, but they can do nothing about it to maintain the corresponding social and work needs.
Besides, some software programs ask for much more than required to complete certain online activities or engagement actions. To illustrate, facial recognition and fingerprint unlocking have become virtual security channels for device access or App admission. Now many apps obtain the owner’s voiceprint characteristics by setting up a voice lock further to guarantee the owner in the name of protection. Also, there is numerous misleading permission opening instructions and frequent authority notifications. For example, Cooking software requires assessing the subscribers’ location, recording and message reading etc.
In addition, the range of available permissions makes it impractical to ensure that individuals’ privacy can be distributed predictably.
For instance, many applications, especially social media platforms, require users to enable access to photo albums and contacts. Maybe in the user’s understanding, they can successfully upload the contents connected to posts or story reels through the accept command. However, according to reports from different platforms and regulatory authorities, these applications obtain the images currently stored in the device and the photos to be continuously uploaded to the database. They even browse the cache in the future, constantly becoming the objects collected by algorithms. In other words, to implement the uploading of a few photos, users have completely handed over all their album storage permissions to the corresponding platform. This infinitely expanded access request will see the device information at a glance, seriously destroying the privacy circle and even making the private space no longer exist.
Default Permissions are Hard to Guard Against
If the privacy leaks mentioned above are, to some extent, the result of user choice, it is the default permissions granted by the system that is the grey area of permission management.
Firstly, scanning the local network is more than necessary for obtaining Wi-Fi and Mobile Data. For systems and operators, it enables them to deduce the quantity and preferences of users by the number of devices linked to a particular LAN and even record the model and brand of the equipment.
Moreover, the netizens tend to overlook how considerably security risks are embedded behind the clipboard’s convenience (Fahl et al., n.d.). For instance, when a customer enters the payment interface on a shopping platform and needs to fill in the bank card information, most users will directly copy the account information of the electronic bank or scan the card instead of manually filling it in. This operation will invariably connect the system operation and essential account information through the simple bridge of the clipboard, unconsciously leaking their privacy in the process (Klemchuk, 2020).
Many users are curious and even puzzled by the precise targeting of social media and shopping platforms. They wonder why the topics or products our fellow family members and we have just mentioned will be algorithmically filtered and recommended to the content homepage when we open a specific application. There are also default profile readings that are often disregarded, such as the address book, input sources and location. The management of these permissions may hold the key to these questions
Current Attempts and Future Solutions to Privacy Risks
Aiming at alleviating social anxiety about data and privacy issues, achieving a balance between personal privacy protection and information sharing can maximize social collaboration and build trustworthy social information processing. Multiple stakeholders have implemented various measures to avoid the negative effects of privacy disclosure as much as possible.
- Individuals
- Netizens can make every effort to fight for their right to know and consent as Internet users through reporting and other means, which contributes to protecting their private lives and personal information. The public has effectively managed the permission terms and pop-up settings when downloading and using the application. However, while paying attention to self-expression, people still need to consider the privacy paradox of online platform self-presentation and be cautious about unreasonable permission requests.
- Platforms and Digital Corporations
- Digital platforms gradually clarify the definition of their responsibilities. For instance, even though many Facebook features provide users more control over their data, some substantial flaws exist (Jones & Soltren, 2005). While exploring different business models and innovative development, they can carry out more investigations and rules to maintain user information security. The platforms can incorporate privacy protection principles and guidelines into the entire design and development procedure in future creative supervision attempts, enhancing users’ understanding of privacy concerns and safeguarding sensitive information.
- Governance Organisations and Policy Makers
- Digital platforms gradually clarify the definition of their responsibilities. For instance, even though many Facebook features provide users more control over their data, some substantial flaws exist (Jones & Soltren, 2005). While exploring different business models and innovative development, they can carry out more investigations and rules to maintain user information security. The platforms can incorporate privacy protection principles and guidelines into the entire design and development procedure in future creative supervision attempts, enhancing users’ understanding of privacy concerns and safeguarding sensitive information.
Through these initiatives, what can be expected is that through the joint endeavours of multiple actors, a more secure online environment can be created, minimizing or eliminating the hidden dangers. The respect and protection of privacy can spare it from excessive and illegal violations, thus becoming a commodity to be traded under digital capital.
References
Australian Law Reform Commission. (2014, March 27). Emerging threats to privacy. ALRC.
Dwyer, T. (2013). Visible ‘Evidence’ in TV News: Regulating Privacy in the Public Interest?. Media and Public Shaming: Drawing the Boundaries of Disclosure, 179.
Flew, T. (2021). Regulating Platforms. Cambridge: Polity
Fahl, Harbach, M., Oltrogge, M., Muders, T., & Smith, M. (n.d.). Hey, You, Get Off of My Clipboard: On How Usability Trumps Security in Android Password Managers. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security (pp. 144–161). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39884-1_12
Gritzalis. (2004). Enhancing Web privacy and anonymity in the digital era. Information Management & Computer Security, 12(3), 255–287. https://doi.org/10.1108/09685220410542615
Keene, P. (2021, April 26). Mobile Phone Clipboard Data Privacy Lacking As Apps Copy and Store Information. Klemchuk LLP. https://www.klemchuk.com/ideate/clipboard-data-privacy-concern-as-mobile-apps-copy-information
Jones, H., & Soltren, J. H. (2005). Facebook: Threats to privacy. Project MAC: MIT Project on Mathematics and Computing, 1(01), 2005.
Suzor. (2019). Lawless: The Secret Rules That Govern Our Digital Lives. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108666428
Team, R. (2021, August 13). Report: Over 63 Million US Citizens Exposed in Massive Data Leak. vpnMentor. https://www.vpnmentor.com/blog/report-onemorelead-leak/
Warren, S. & Brandeis, L. (1890), “The rights to privacy”, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 5, pp. 193-220.
533 million Facebook users’ phone numbers and personal data have been leaked online. (2021, April 21). Business Insider.