Dr. David Lyon of Queen’s University defines surveillance as “the focused, systematic and routine attention to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction”. The constant surveillance of personal data forces a computer scientist, who is always utilizing a network connection, to find Dr. Ron Deibert and journalists Andrei Soldatov and Irina Borogan’s informative presentations on technological surveillance in our daily lives eye-opening. In his discussion, Dr. Deibert focuses mainly on the amount of data users allow social media platforms and other third parties to access. Correspondingly, Soldatov and Borogan touch on the more intensive surveillance that occurred at the Sochi Olympic Games in Russia. In both presentations it is evident that surveillance is an ongoing issue that violates our basic human rights to privacy. Surveillance of our personal data can give insight and a new perspective on viewing technology, but there are many concerns including openly accessible personal details on social media, political censorship, and the intersection of human rights with technology.

Surveillance changes the extent to which individuals express honest opinions and beliefs on social media. Everyone is constantly connected in todays society. The amount of information shared on social media platforms makes users extremely vulnerable. An individual is prone to a targeted attack if the information falls into the wrong hands. Users need to think beyond the computer screen to realize the unknown dangers of where data is stored. Everyone must also be aware of how the data is transmitted and who can access it. Web monitoring for social media has become excessive in recent years. It is becoming increasingly difficult to stay safe online. For example, Dr. Deibert considers the task of sending an email from a computer or mobile phone. It is crucial to understand the multiple jurisdictions and complex path that the message will be following. The notion of continual connection that is required for receiving the latest news and revelations from resources across the world. As a result, individuals are highly exposed to the vulnerabilities, security holes, or unintentional flaws of the company providing the “free service.” Dr. Deibert also explains how – through his research at the Citizen Lab – the team was able to reverse-engineer a fitness tracker. It was astonishing to hear the similar details that this device shared along with various social media platforms. Moreover, the fitness tracker and social media carelessly handle and do not protect users sensitive data. At the same time, this private information is being stolen from public citizens and exploited for political advantages. Situations like this provoke civil disobedience in the population – the users that end up being exploited are more likely to make decisions contrary to the laws in place.

Surveillance strengthens the way governing bodies control legislation over the people of a country. Dr. Deibert introduces the idea of looking at the “whole haystack” rather than a single needle. He is suggesting that security teams should focus more on gathering as much data as possible as opposed to targeting a single threat. Likewise, Soldatov and Borogan shared investigative research about the heavy presence of the Russian System of Operative-Investigative Measures (S.O.R.M.) at the 2014 Winter Olympics. Due to the diverse crowd, the surveillance was the most intrusive yet transparent occurrence seen by the pair of journalists. After analyzing open source documents in preparation for the Winter Olympics the two realize that the “free” Wi-Fi offered in Russia is heavily monitored by “deep packet inspection.” This method thoroughly records all data sent through the inspected waypoint and reports any anomalies. This means that, although no currency was exchanged, the Wi-Fi user shares personal details with the Russian Security Services (F.S.B.) as well as the Russian government. It is safe to say that any device from a webcam to a laptop was completely visible to the F.S.B. during the games. The country slowly turned into an aggressively monitored home of big data collection. This is one of the largest signs of growing power seen by the Kremlin as well as the entirety of cyberspace. Dr. Deibert stresses how this directly relates to the imminent threat of terrorism in the United States. The endless packet transmission monitoring and scanning leads to the technological intersection of humans rights.

The the current level of surveillance inflicts basic human rights to privacy, and security. The user has every right to feel safe and secure online. One should not have to worry about sensitive information being transmitted from one server to the next. Both the user and the application developer are never fully certain of the encryption the services offer. There have been non-isolated instances found by Dr. Deibert and the Citizen Lab researchers involving multiple popular applications including the UC Browser that leaked unencrypted, plain-text data to the world wide web. Although the users accept the terms of service before using the application, they do not consent to their personal data being used by third-parties. Usage of users data in this form makes the users a part of the fragmented Internet and a source for income. An underlying message from both guest lecturers is to limit the amount of data you provide online or even use a false identity. Taking part in this wide ecosystem of online services is the result of the user allowing themselves to be a stream of information for the company providing the service. It is a unique relationship where we allow ourselves to be endlessly surveilled at the cost of our virtual freedom online to browse and interact with the latest web content. Conversely, there are many alternative media sources online that get blocked IP blocked and are no longer visible to the average Internet. These smaller-scale projects often advocate for the user group that is not part of the mainstream media channels and platforms.

All platforms of data communication that are available to users today are representative of the risks present when data is readily available for surveillance and analysis. In Soldatov and Borogan’s examples found at the Olympics and those researched by Dr. Deibert and the Citizen Lab, it is clear that there are many imperfections in the way companies handle user’s sensitive information. In the future, it will be even more difficult to avoid the fatal flaws of online media platforms because these services will have further knowledge about a user’s decisions and preferences. It is important to always consider the consequences of the amount of information users allow to be shared online, the political costs of this information, and the basic human rights that individuals all possess. This difficult actuality is why all users must think twice before participating in the growing power of social media and other “free” online services.