Reference no: EM133276922

Discussion: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" - "Who will watch the watchers?"

Under the Writs of Assistance issued by King George III of England, the governors of the colonies engaged in wholesale search and seizure against the colonists that founded the United States. In response to these trespasses, the authors of the Constitution and Bill of Rights explicitly enumerated certain rights including the "right... to be secure". Preservation of the fourth amendment "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" in a modern context requires interpretation of complex technological, legal, and policy issues. In modern society, constitutional protection extends to telecommunications traffic and digital documents. However, few rights are absolute and exceptions to the right to be secure exist to support law enforcement operations. Investigators must understand and respect the legal methods by which they may abrogate the rights of citizens in the course of an investigation. Failure to respect the legal process not only harms the rights of citizens, it also jeopardizes the successful prosecution of criminals and terrorists. The right to privacy is a penumbral right that emanates from other rights within the United States Constitution. Corporations are legally people under the law. Protecting constitutional rights to security and privacy protects not only individuals but also corporations and corporate interests. Privacy and security rights support the ability of corporations to leverage trade secrets and intellectual property in the process of innovation. Regulating privacy violations and protecting consumer privacy rights will help to ensure long-term market confidence. Failure to protect consumer and corporate privacy rights could undermine the long-term health of the domestic economy. Encryption is one of the principle means for providing information security and privacy in the digital domain. One of the unintended consequences of a failure to protect the security and privacy rights of the citizenry is the increased development and use of strong cryptography. Although administrative policies and the law legally regulate distribution of cryptographic software, the courts have found all such laws to be unconstitutional. Although the Supreme Court has never ruled anonymity a protected right, state and district courts have held that, in certain circumstances, it is. Privacy enhancing technologies (PETs) are those protocols established for providing anonymity and privacy. These technologies have the undesirable consequence of equally protecting both law abiding and criminal interests equally. These PET projects are not rogue endeavors. Many of these technologies are offshoots of Department of Defense projects to enhance Internet security. A formal effort to continue the development privacy enhancing technologies would serve the governments interests by allowing greater control over the process and technology. By rigorously protecting the rights of citizens and more effectively pursuing crime using established, legal processes, the government can effectively serve the public interest without needlessly chilling the economy, speech, or behavior. Does the "right to be secure" apply to digital documents or communications? Is there a "right" to anonymity? Do users have a "right to be secure" while at work? To what extent may United States Citizens act to protect their privacy, security and anonymity? What effect might these actions have on legitimate law enforcement investigations? If we undermine individual privacy rights, what would happen to corporate privacy rights? How might this affect intellectual property rights? How might undermining privacy then undermine our economy?