Privacy vs Security
Table of contents
Defined
The terms "privacy" and "security," while both important, are often incorrectly used synonymously. Data harvest sites often infer that being highly secure means that your communications are also extremely private. This is very often not the case.
- Security
- Security is the act of preventing unwanted parties from having access to information. It defines the measures taken to protect information data.
- Privacy
- Privacy defines the boundaries to be protected by security. It is through an information owner's values and concepts of threat that definitions for what is considered private are made.
Functional Relationship
When "security" and "privacy" are functionally working in tandem the originator and
The act of stepping aside indicates a need for privacy and the whispered tone is the means of security applied. This maps directly across to one friend typing to another on a secure service such as RetroShare or an OCE "please don't tell anyone yet, but I won the lottery last night." Past experience with the recipient leads the communicator to have confidence "don't tell anyone yet" will set privacy expectations and be honoured. The communication medium is expected to keep the promise of satisfying the security requirements.
Violations
The originator and recipient define the terms and the communication medium role is only to provide promised services. Any violation of communicator intentions by the recipient, or the medium is a breach of trust as defined and agreed to by the communicators. This is a security breach. The measures to protect the information failed. Should any of the communicated information be digested by an unintended party, including the communication
Modern Dilemma
In the current day the messenger service has been allowed to have an active role in defining the parameters of the communication. The "free" data harvesting communication repositories have been allowed to claim ownership of all data passing into their networks and residing on their computers, regardless of it's point of origination or destination. In so doing these communications services are now active participants defining the boundaries of privacy, what security is sufficient to safeguarding the privacy and whom are the legitimate conversation participants. This issue lay at the core of our communications and is in clear violation of the social normalcy rules.
This active participation completely removes control of the communication from the originator and receiver and siphons yet more power to define the shape and character of our society from participants in this social paradigm. The determination of where the boundaries of privacy are no longer with the individual but defined from a "one size fits all" perspective that protects no one except the communication service itself. The notion of privacy is essentially eradicated to meet the needs of the service with the communication originator and recipient left only with the illusion of control because they can block visibility to others inconsequential to the services goals.