privacy vs. National Security

 This week's takeaway is "Privacy vs. National Security."

-Recent Privacy Developments: The legislature makes it a privacy crime to capture any data or characteristics of private property by using ground penetrating technology absent permission.

-Deeper Issues in Legislation: Privacy is essential for many legislators, especially regarding private property, and is at the forefront of their agendas.

-Failed Proposed Legislation: As discussed in class, an example of failed legislation was a proposed amendment to the Utah constitution that would declare privacy an inalienable right. In both years passed, it failed to address government surveillance.

-Blog Discussion Analysis and Recap: Edward Snowden, Hero or Traitor?

-Civil Disobedience: In class, we debated whether Edward Snowden could be compared to other great civil disobeyers such as MLK or Gandhi. 

-Chloe's Comments: Chloe believed that because Snowden was near the intelligence community, his inability to get more crowded involvement and form a coalition essentially made him a lone wolf.

-Jaskehar's Comments: Jaskehar believed he left a good lasting impact, but the impact differed from what MLK or Gandhi did.

-Kai's Comments: Kai believed that the most significant difference was that other historical figures were violating laws with real and serious implications, whereas Snowden evaded the consequences of the espionage act.

-Professor Dryer's comments: He believes in a higher law and that someone should be willing to accept the consequences.

-Federal Whistle Blower act: If an individual working for the government exposes it of wrongful conduct, they can protect their jobs and have significant protections enacted upon them by congress.

Can Snowden avail himself of that label?

Class Poll Results (Which option is best for the country to deal with Edward Snowden?)

-Stand Trial with whistleblower protections overwhelmingly won with 6

Thursday Recap:

-Ongoing Discussion: Aside from legislators, there is also an ongoing discussion about whether law enforcement should have access to one's phones.

-The Debate: 

-Privacy Advocates: Opponents of this idea believe that because law enforcement has many ways of tracking and attaining information about individuals, there is no point in accessing a phone. 

Search Warrant Advocates: It is incredibly costly to jailbreak a phone and not consistently successful. Thus, legislation has been filed in congress to have a backdoor for the phone, again only under a search warrant.

Flaws of this legislation: Terrorists may not store all the information on the phone or buy a different phone with an additional requirement in a foreign host country.

Established Legislation elsewhere:  In England, it is a crime if a suspect or defendant refuses to provide a password or encryption key when law enforcement has a search warrant to search a phone.

Should the 5th amendment allow the government that might be incriminating itself by giving them the password?

Class Opinion Poll Results: 6 individuals agreed that if a person is convicted of a crime such as murder or rape, they should be forced to comply with giving up their password; six others disagreed.