Internet raises privacy concerns

I've always thought that law is an essential part of human existence. It binds us and brings us to the same page. Often, though, when I think of law, I think primarily of the laws passed by a government.

This is only one of the many types of "laws" that exist, however. There are also societal laws in the form of cultures and customs. And taking an even wider perspective of laws, perhaps even too wide, there are quite a few physical laws, such as the ones good ol' Newton came up with.

One curious aspect of laws is that they can often turn subjective. To address this concern, we rely on a judicial system to give us a final say. But even with these mandates from judges, it's still up to regular people and law enforcers to interpret them correctly. This leads to a "gray area" that can cause confusion.

The definitions of public versus private are a perfect example of one of these gray areas. Obviously, the inside of a home is considered private while the street is considered public, but the privacy implications of being inside a car on the street are a little more confusing.

Enter the internet. The internet created a whole heap of problems related to privacy and the definitions of public versus private. The way I see privacy on the internet is that anything stored on the internet without means of hiding or encryption is open to be viewed by the public, whereas anything protected by methods such as encryption is, and should remain, private.

As a personal standpoint, I also consider anything that is stored on a personal computer to be private. There are several edge cases for this, however. Many websites store text files on visitors' computers that store a unique identifyer. These are called cookies, and websites have a variety of uses for them, ranging from letting users who log in stay logged in to tracking where those users go.

That's right, tracking. DoubleClick, a large online advertising firm recently acquired by Google for $3.1 billion, uses cookies to track users over the web and catalog what ads they click on. They then use this data to engineer better advertisements. To me, however, their tracking of users over the web seems like a breach of privacy.

Wireless networks also lead to issues with privacy. As with many newly developing technologies widely available to the public, the high learning curve means a significant portion of the user base ends up configuring their hardware incorrectly. There are numerous completely unsecured wireless networks in residential and business areas that pose a serious threat to the security of their users.

Not only can these unsecured wireless networks be abused deliberately and maliciously, they can also lead to unintentional abuse. Although it may not seem like it since it only involves clicking a button, even connecting to a unsecured wireless network is a breach in privacy.

Furthermore, some modern wireless software may automatically connect to any available network. Users running this type of software may connect to a private unsecured wireless network without the user noticing, and the operator of the wireless network will then be able to track the user's surfing habits, record passwords and credit card numbers and do other nefarious things.

To further complicate matters, there is a new technology in the works that aims at blanketing a whole city with wireless access, dubbed WiMax. Politicians have been labeling it as "internet for everyone."

Having the ability to access information anywhere in the city would be incredibly helpful. I know I've run into situations where I wished I had Google handy. But blanketing a whole city with a wireless network can cause issues with security.

An identification and authentication system would have to be installed, because without it any hacker or spammer could have access to the internet anonymously, using public resources for nefarious purposes. Also, in the case that someone does subvert the authentication system, it would be next to impossible to identify where the malicious user is coming from.

Laws have the ability to bring us freedom in the form of security, but they can also be restricting. All throughout history there has been a trade off between security and freedom, with open- societies leaning towards freedom and closed societies leaning towards security.

Even in the middle ages, this concept was in play with the walled cities. The walls offered protection from pillagers, but at the same time they also confined residents and created conflicts between those who lived inside and those who didn't.

In the new age of the Internet, the masses will have to reach a consensus on where to draw the line in this trade off. Security can be increased, but not without the expense of decreasing the freedom of the Internet.

We must make decisions that benefit ourselves, the consumer. Otherwise, corporations will make the choice for us.