By Sarah Kim corporations weaken privacy The leakage of more than 400 nude photos on Aug. 31 of over 101 celebrities, including Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton and Lea Michele, attracted controversy and varied reactions from civilians and celebrities alike. While material that featured naked celebrities, the magnitude of the hacking was unprecedented. As a result of this leak, increased attention was drawn to the growing trend in cyber-abuse that has been facilitated by agency activity and a lack of transparency from corporations. Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple Inc., acknowledged that while poor security was not necessarily the cause of the leak, his company could have taken more initiative to inform users of the danger hackers pose to their privacy. Often, cloud services like iCloud are enabled by default, meaning that these nude photos may have been uploaded to the cloud service without the celebrities knowlalso do not guarantee full protection against hackers. It is unfair to blame the celebrities for taking nude photos, Sungwoo Yang (11) said. I believe that most of the responsibility lies with the hackers, and that Apple should take part of the blame as well for not doing enough to make the cloud services secure. These celebrities were not aware of how vulnerable they were. Withthese celebrities were. Some of the most well-equipped procurers of private material are prominent intelligence agencies that justify their access to personal information as a means of detecting terrorists and other criminals. With the magnitude of its surveillance, the National Security Agency (NSA), in whistleblower Edward Snowdens words, seeks to make privacy a thing of the past. One of the things Snowden revealed was that the NSA
can turn on your Macbook camera, said Peter Beckway,
English teacher. Once, when I was living in Saudi Arabia, I was sitting on my couch and watching TV when suddenly I noticed that my Macbook camera was on. I freaked out, and just shut down my laptop. Some members of the NSA are not only interested in combating terrorism and crime. Having access to such a large amount of personal data provides the association with a plethora of personal nude photos and videos that get caught in its surveillance systems. According to Snowden, some members of the NSA share nude photos for their own personal enjoyment. The large databases that we have can literally suck up the entire Internet, and communication [between] all kinds of people all around the world, Mr. Beckway said. all that data, but when the volume of data is that big, youre actually going to end up missing important information. Its counterintuitive. between 2008 and 2010 belonging to the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). Besides manipulating online polls and debates, and tracking people by impersonating spammers, the GCHQ, with the aid of the NSA, intercepted and stored the webcam images of millions of Yahoo users. Approximately 180,000 of these images featured nudity. democracy if the government can just go around and ignore our basic rights? said Ruth Poulsen, English teacher. Why should agencies like the NSA have to secretly go around laws to get masses of information from people who arent even suspects? [These agencies] have to have some accountability.
HOW ARE THEY
WATCHING YOU? Here are some of the most common ways hackers monitor your online activities.
GRAPHIC by: yeena yoon
Source: infoworld
Flash Cookies Theft
By stealing user cookies, hackers receive access to private ID
and passwords, allowing them to disguise as legitimate use
NOT ALONE
Ds ers.
y g B ut Son o y La icia tr a P
Government digital surveillance stirs
BY Claire Kim controversy among public If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. This seems to be the position of the US government regarding digital surveillance. With this mentality, the government, since 2001, has enacted several laws such as the Patriot Act of 2001 and the Government Surveillance Transparency Act of 2013, which allow increasingly pervasive programs to monitor the lives of citizens. The disclosure of this information sparked global controversy, and the public began to look more closely into the ways the government was keeping track of their lives. Government surveillance remains a polemical issue among digital citizens around the world. In the past decade, many governments have passed legislation enabling more surveillance programs. Such laws have given the American government unprecedented power, as legislation has reduced regulations that previously checked for the possibility of power abuse by the government. Compared to older in order to gather information about foreign suspects, current legislation does not necessitate such warrants. As the Constitution stands right now, [government digital surveillance] is not a right of the government, said Alex Barton-Lopez, social studies teacher. The social contract [the American government] entered into did not suggest that the government had that right. The earliest account of such modern surveillance was the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, which allowed the government to wiretap the communications of foreign intelligence targets. Because warrants were required for nated with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). In 2008, under Barack Obamas presidency, FISA was amended to allow the government to keep track of the communications of American nationals as well, as opposed to only international suspects. This expansion in the FISA
Fake Wireless Access Points (WAP)
Lure in public users by setting up fake WAPs, which are supposed to supply wireless connection. Obtained log-on credentials used on popular websites to hack accounts.
act enraged American citizens, as many citizens viewed
this action as an overreach of government power. between the government and the citizens, said Jennifer Kim (10), AP US History student. A capable government should be able to carry out all of its security missions and operations without harming the rights of its citizens. It is unacceptable that governments be given the right to be Big Brother, [a totalitarian government form presented in George Orwells novel 1984], to its citizens. Currently, the most controversial surveillance program is PRISM, launched by the NSA in coordination with its Britain equivalent, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), under the Protect America Act of the Bush Administration. This ongoing program allows the government to use upstream collection, which requires large Internet companies such as Google and Yahoo to turn over large portions of data to the government government hacked into numerous Internet companies data storage systems to acquire the information illegally. When the BBC reported last year of this hack, many citizens were infuriated, as they saw this event as a breach of corporations rights. Causing further outrage, it was the NSA and PRISM partners in the millions of dollars. This also caused many citizens to doubt whether there was an ulterior, monetary motive to legalizing the program. formation collection and citizens rights, Nicholas Kim (9) said. They need to have certain safeguards, like court approval processes, in order to make the system fair. Without these measures, information collection is merely an abuse of government power.