Frontier of Data Privacy and National Security: When Liberty is Toll for Safety

In investigating a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that took 14 lives, a controversy has erupted around national security and data privacy.  Should the FBI be able to unlock a dead terrorist’s iPhone? The United States government thinks it should. Apple Inc. thinks otherwise. 

In an open letter to customers, Apple CEO Tim Cook explains, “We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government. Ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.”

In midst of two colliding ideas, one has to choose between privacy rights of one individual vs. invasion of privacy for the national security. As one must say, keeping things in private is inevitable to one’s life, it’s my business and you’re out! Nevertheless, one’s right must not prevail if it obstructs others. With this, the battle between what is frontier for invading a person’s data without a need for consent; and when a government can impedes this right.

With the increasing trend of technological growth, new communication technologies are of obvious interest to law enforcement agencies. Some law enforcement officials see the Web sites that a person visits, or the e-mail that a person sends or receives, as information that could be relevant to the prosecution of criminals. On that basis, they have argued that law enforcement agencies should have legal access to such information equivalent to that available for telephone conversations. Law enforcement officials currently have access to pen registers and trap-and-trace registers on telephone calls, which show what calls were made from a particular phone (pen registers) or to the phone (trap and trace).

On the other hand, Information privacy is the privacy of personal information and usually relates to personal data stored on computer systems. The need to maintain information privacy is applicable to collected personal information, such as medical records, financial data, criminal records, political records, business related information or website data.

Me, as a blogger from this site, does not favor upon giving an absolute power to the government in invading ones’ privacy. However, I reserve some areas or situations where government can take over the privilege of mine, if and only if the higher court orders for the discovery an eminent information that can be used for a greater cause; provided that no other evidential matter can be obtained. By this means, the government maintains the power reasonable without exposing the personal details of alleged defendant.

Lastly, let me share this famous line by Benjamin Franklin, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety”, the foundation of my point.