Brief-data privacy

Background:
The modern World Wide Web as we know it was first invented in 1989 by Sir Tim Berners-Lee while he was working for CERN. Since that time, the use of the internet and computers in general has exploded exponentially. Now businesses, banks, hospitals, and almost all other areas of society store data via computers and transfer information through the internet.
However, the current system of data storage and internet security still contains many flaws, which have led to security breaches, leaking of information, and robbery. In October 2010, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced S. 3898, a bill that would extend EFTA’s Regulation E protections to certain local government entities, including municipalities and school districts. Another bill, the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act, presented by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) would “prevent and mitigate identity theft, to ensure privacy, to provide notice of security breaches, and to enhance criminal penalties, law enforcement assistance, and other protections against security breaches, fraudulent access, and misuse of personally identifiable information.” These two bills are still waiting to be voted on by Congress.

Motion: This House should increase protections over the data of its citizens

Arguments for:

The current system is not protected enough—the new regulations are not perfect, but they will be better than what we have now
• Organized cyber thieves, meanwhile, have stolen more than $70 million from small to mid-sized businesses, nonprofits, towns and cities, according to the FBI.
• On Sept. 29, computer crooks stole $600,000 from the coastal town of Brigantine, N.J.; seven months earlier, computer crooks stole $100,000 from Egg Harbor Township just 20 miles away. In late December 2009, an organized cyber gang took $3.8 million from the Duanesburg Central School District in New York.
• In 2008 alone, the total cost of data privacy breaches in U.S. corporations was $721 million.
Extra governmental protection for businesses will save money
• If we can provide a system to adequately protect and keep this information safe, then much of the money that is continually lost will be kept and used by the schools, businesses, cities, etc.
The protections will benefit the lives of citizens
• We can further protect the data of individual citizens, as well as important areas in their lives. If hospitals, schools, and towns are all more protected, then they will all be able to offer better services to the citizens in their areas.
• Citizens should have their privacy protected by the government
• American citizens live under a government that is supposed to “promote the general welfare” of its citizens. The government needs to do that in the area of data privacy, where currently it lets its citizens be open to attack, fraud and theft with little to no legislature that would put the criminals in prison.
• We send a message of weakness to our own citizens if we choose not to protect them from such a prevalent problem

Arguments against:

The government has no right to interfere with business
• The government should not involve itself in business affairs. Businesses should be left to decide for themselves which risks to take and how to protect their own information. Letting the government help do the job will only slow down business and bring down profits if businesses have to follow a new, stricter security protocol
• Involving the government will only open up more problems, like who has access to the secure information, and if the government will have access to private business records. There is only a greater chance for security breaches and corruption by bringing in another group to handle this security issue
Citizens should be able to protect themselves
• There are plenty of simple steps to take to ensure that you do not get your identity stolen or have your bank accounts broken into.
• Citizens should have freedom to choose how to protect their information, if at all, without the government telling them exactly which way is the best for them
The government needs to educate and inform rather than step in and take action
• It would be a much better idea for the government to provide some simple (optional) steps for businesses and individuals to take in order to secure their data. This leaves open the option of personal choice, as well as limits the government’s involvement in this area
• Businesses that have a grasp on how to protect themselves can find ways to do it effectively without needing the government’s intervention

Sources

http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/564
http://www.mikesprouse.com/2010/10/26/the-online-privacy-debate/
http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/trends/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=228000243&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_All
http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/08/online-privacy-debates-heat-up.html
http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2010/01/privacy-day-sparks-debate.php
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1490
http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/apr2010/ca2010049_718474.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/25/opinion/25weds2.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/oct/01/eu-online-privacy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/sep/28/filesharing-acs-law