Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils. - General John Stark
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! - Patrick Henry
Privacy, n. 1. The state or condition of being alone, undisturbed, or free from public attention, as a matter of choice or right; seclusion; freedom from interference or intrusion. 2. The state of being privy to some act 3. a. Absence or avoidance of publicity or display; secrecy, concealment, discretion; protection from public knowledge or availability. 3. b. The keeping of a secret; reticence. - Oxford English Dictionary
Privacy is often taken for granted. When the US Constitution was drafted, the founding fathers made sure to put in provisions to guarantee the privacy of the citizens they would govern. Most scholars agree that their intention was to prevent government intrusion in private lives and activities. They were very forward thinking, trying to ensure this protection would continue indefinitely into the future. Unfortunately, even the most forward thinking, well intentioned individual won't be able to cover all of the possible scenarios that will occur in the future.
Since that fateful day in 1787, a war has raged between those advocating absolute privacy and those advocating reasonable intrusion for the sake of security. At the extreme edge of the argument are the non-consequentialists who believe that privacy should be absolute. They believe that privacy is non-negotiable and that the loss of privacy is akin to slavery. A common argument is that giving up privacy merely encourages additional loss. In other words, if you allow your privacy to be compromised once, then those that violate it will expect to be able to violate it again.
At the other edge are those that believe that privacy is irrelevant in the face of potential evil. This is also a non-consequentialist view. Individuals with this view tend to argue that if you have something to hide, then you are obviously guilty of something.
Somewhere in the middle are the consequentialists who believe that privacy is essential to a point. Violation of privacy should be allowed when the benefit of doing so outweighs the benefit of keeping something private. In other words, if disclosing a secret may save a life, or prevent an innocent person from going to jail, then a violation of privacy should be allowed.
The right to privacy has been fought over for years. In more recent years, technological advances have brought to light many of the problems with absolute privacy, and at the same time, have highlighted the need for some transparency. Technology has benefits for both the innocent and the criminal. It makes no delineation between the two, offering the same access to information for both.
New technologies have allowed communication over long distances, allowing criminals to coordinate criminal activities without the need to gather. Technology has brought devastating weaponry to the average citizen. Terrorists can use an Internet search engine to learn how to build bombs, plan attacks, and communicate with relative privacy. Common tools can be used to replicate identification papers, allowing criminals access to secure areas. The Internet can be used to obtain access to remote systems without permission.
Technology can also be used in positive ways. Mapping data can be used to optimize travel, find new places, and get you home when you're lost. Online stores can be used to conveniently shop from your home, or find products you normally wouldn't have access to. Social networking can be used to keep in touch with friends and relatives, and to form new friendships with strangers you may never have come in contact with otherwise. Wikipedia can be used for research and updated by complete strangers to spread knowledge. Companies can stay in contact with customers, alerting them of new products, updates to existing ones, or even alert them to potential problems with something they previously purchased.
In the last ten or so years, privacy in the US has been "under attack." These so-called attacks come from many different sources. Governmental agencies seek access to more and more private information in order to combat terrorism and other criminal activities. Private organizations seek to obtain private information to identify new customers, customize advertisements, prevent fraud, etc. Technology has enabled these organizations to obtain this data in a variety of ways, often unbeknownst to the average user.
When was the last time you went to the airport and waited for someone to arrive at the gate? How about escorting someone to the gate before their flight? As recently as 20 years ago, it was possible to do both. However, since that time, security measures have been put in place to prevent non-ticketed individuals access beyond security checkpoints. Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, security has been enhanced to include random searches, bomb sniffing, pat downs, full-body scanners, and more. In fact, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) started random screening at the gate in 2008. Even more recently, the TSA has authorized random swabbing of passenger hands to detect explosive residue. While these measures arguably enhance security, it does so at the expense of the private individual. Many travelers feel violated by the process, even arguing that they are assumed to be guilty, having to prove their innocence every time they fly.
Traditionally, any criminal proceeding is conducted with the assumption of innocence. A criminal is considered innocent of a crime unless and until they are proven guilty. In the airport example above, the passengers are being screened with what can be considered an assumption of guilt. If you refuse to be screened, you are barred from flying, if lucky, or taken in for additional questioning and potentially jailed for the offense. Of course, individuals are not granted the right to fly, but rather offered the opportunity at the expense of giving up some privacy. It's when these restrictions are applied to daily life, without the consent of the individual, that more serious problems arise.
Each and every day, the government gathers information about its citizens. This information is generally available to the public, although access is not necessarily easy. How this information is used, however, is often a source of criticism by privacy advocates. Massive databases of information have been built with algorithms digging through the data looking for patterns. If these patterns match, the individuals to whom the data belongs can be subject to additional scrutiny. This "fishing" for wrongdoing is often at the crux of the privacy argument. Generally speaking, if you look hard enough, and you gather enough data, you can find wrongdoing. More often, however, false positives pop up and individuals are subjected to additional scrutiny without warrant. In some cases, individuals can be wrongly detained.
Many privacy opposers argue that an innocent person has nothing to hide. However, this argument can be considered a fallacy. Professor Daniel Solove wrote an essay explaining why this argument is faulty. He argues that the "nothing to hide argument" is essentially hollow. Privacy is an inherently individualistic preference. Without knowing the full extent of how information will be used, it is impossible to say that revealing everything will have no ill effects, assuming the individual is innocent of wrongdoing. For instance, data collected by the government may not be used to identify you as a criminal, but it may result in embarrassment or feelings of exposure. What one person may consider a non-issue, others may see as evil or wrong.
These arguments extend beyond government surveillance and into the private sector as well. Companies collect information about consumers at an alarming rate. Information entered into surveys, statistics collected from websites, travel information collected from toll booths, and more can be used to profile individuals. This information is made available, usually at a cost, to other companies or even individuals. This information isn't always kept secure, either. Criminals often access remote systems, obtaining credit card and social security numbers. Stalkers and pedophiles use social networking sites to follow their victims. Personal information posted on public sites can find its way into credit reports and is even used by some businesses to justify firing employees.
Privacy laws have been put in place to prevent such abuses, but information is already out there. Have you taken the time to put your name into a search engine lately? Give it a try, you may be surprised by the information you can find out about yourself. These are public records that can be accessed by anyone. Financial and real estate information is commonly available to the public, accessible to those knowing how to look for it. Criminal records and court proceedings are published on the web now, allowing anyone a chance to access it.
Whenever you access a website, check out a book from the library, or chat with a friend in email, you run the risk of making that information available to people you don't want to have it. In recent years, it has been common for potential employers to use the Internet to obtain background information on a potential employee. In some cases, embarrassing information can be uncovered, casting a negative light on an individual. Teachers have been fired because of pictures they posted, innocently, on their profile pages. Are you aware of how the information you publish on the Internet can be used against you?
There is no clear answer on what should and should not be kept private. Likewise, there is no clear answer on what private data the government and private companies should have access to. It is up to you, as an individual, to make a conscious choice as to what you make public. In an ever evolving world, the decisions you make today can and will have an impact on what may happen in the future. What you may think of as an innocent act today can potentially be used against you in the future. It's up to you to fight for your privacy, both from the government, and from the companies you interact with. Be sure you're aware of how your data can be used before you provide it. Privacy and private data is being used in new, interesting, and potentially harmful ways every day. Be sure you're aware of how your data can be used before you provide it.
Authentication is a tricky problem. The goal of authentication is to verify the identify of the person, device, machine, etc. that is attempting to gain access to the protected system. There are many factors to consider when designing an authentication system. Here is a brief sampling:
How much security is necessary?
Do we require username?
How strong should the password be?
Do we need multi-factor authentication?
The need for authentication typically means that the data being accessed is sensitive in some way. This can be something as simple as a todo list or a user's email, or as important as banking or top secret information. It can also mean that the data being accessed is valuable in some way such as a site that requires a subscription. So, the security necessary is dependent on the data being protected.
Usually, authentication systems require a username and some form of a password. For more secure systems, multi-factor authentication is used. Multi-factor authentication means that multiple pieces of information are used to authenticate the user. These vary depending on the security required. In the United States, federal regulators recognize the following factors:
Something the user knows (e.g., password, PIN)
Something the user has (e.g., ATM card, smart card)
Something the user is (e.g., biometric characteristic such as a fingerprint)
A username and a password is an example of a single-factor authentication mechanism. When you use an ATM machine, you supply it with an ATM card and then use a PIN. This is an example of two-factor authentication.
The U.S. Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) recommends the use of multi-factor authentication for financial institutions. Unfortunately, most of the authentication systems currently in place are still single-factor authentication systems, despite asking for several pieces of information. For example, if you log into your bank system you use a username and password. Once the username and password pass, you are often asked for additional information such as answers to challenge questions. These are all examples of things the user knows, thus only a single factor.
Some institutions have begun using additional factors to identify the user such as a one-time password sent to an email address or cell phone. This can be cumbersome, however, as it can often take additional time to receive this information. To combat this, browser cookies are used after the first successful authentication. After the user logs in for the first time, they are offered a chance to have the system place a "secure token" on their system. Subsequent logins use this secure token in addition to the username and password to authenticate the user. This is arguably a second factor as it's something the user has, as opposed to something they know. On the other hand, it is extremely easy to duplicate or steal cookies.
There are other ways that two-factor authentication can be circumvented as well. Since most institutions only use a single communication mechanism, hijacking that communication medium can result in a security breach.
Man-in-the-middle attacks use fake websites to lure users in and steal the authentication information the user uses to authenticate. This can happen transparently to the user by forwarding the information to the actual institution and letting the user continue to access the system. More sophisticated attacks have the user "fail" authentication the first time and let them in on subsequent tries. The attacker can then use the first authentication attempt to gain access themselves.
Another method is the use of Trojans. If a user can be tricked into installing malicious software into their system, an attacker can ride on the user's session, injecting their own transactions into the communications channel.
Defending against these attacks is not easy and may be impossible in many situations. For instance, requiring a second method of communication for authentication may help to authenticate the user, but if an attacker can hijack the main communication path, they can still obtain access to the user's current session. Use of encryption and proper training of users can help mitigate these types of attacks, but ultimately, any system using a public communication mechanism is susceptible to hijacking.
Session Security
Once authentication is complete, session security comes into play. Why go through all the trouble of authenticating the user if you're not protecting the data they're accessing? Assuming that the data itself is protected, we need to focus on protecting the data being transferred to and from the user. Additionally, we need to protect the user's session itself.
Session hijacking is the term used to identify the stealing of a user's session information to gain access to the information the user is accessing. There are four primary method of session hijacking.
Session Fixation
Session Sidejacking
Physical Access
Cross-site Scripting
Physical access is pretty straightforward. This involves an attacker directly accessing the user's computer terminal and copying the session data. Session data can be something as simple as an alphanumeric token displayed right in the URL of the site being accessed. Or, it can be a piece of data on the machine such as a browser cookie.
Session fixation refers to a method by which an attacker can trick a user into using a pre-determined session ID. Once the user authenticates, the attacker gains access by using the same session ID. The system recognized the session ID as an authenticated session and lets the user in without verification.
Session Sidejacking involves an attacker intercepting the traffic between a user and the system. If a session is not encrypted, the attacker can obtain the session ID or cookie used to identify the user's session. Once this information is obtained, the attacker can use the same information to gain access to the user's session.
Finally, cross-side scripting is when an attacker tricks the user's computer into sending session information to the attacker. This can happen when a user accesses a website that contains malicious code. For instance, an attacker can create a website with a special link to a well-known site such as a bank. The link contains additional code that, when run, sends the user's authentication or session information to the attacker.
Encryption of the communications channel can mitigate some of these attack scenarios, but not all of them. Programmers should ensure that additional information is used to verify a user's session. For instance, something as simple as verifying the user's source IP address in addition to a session cookie is often enough to mitigate both physical access and session sidejacking. Not allowing a pre-defined session ID can prevent session fixation. And finally, proper coding can prevent cross-side scripting.
Additionally, any session information stored on the remote system being accessed should be properly secured as well. Merely securing the data accessed isn't enough if an attacker can access the remote system and steal session information.
Unauthentication
Finally, how and when should a user be unauthenticated? Unauthentication is often overlooked when designing a secure system. If the user fails to log out, then attacks such as session hijacking become easier. Unauthentication can be tricky, however. There a number of factors to consider such as:
How and when should a user's session be closed?
Should a user's session time out?
How long should the timer be?
Most unauthentication currently consists of a user's session timing out. After a pre-determined period of inactivity, the system will log a user out, deleting their session. Depending on the situation, this can be incredibly disruptive. For example, if a user's email system has a short time out, they run the risk of losing a long email they've been working on. Some systems can mitigate this by recording the user's data prior to logging them out, making it available again upon login so the user doesn't lose it. Regardless, the longer the time out, the less secure a session can be.
Other unauthentication mechanisms have been discussed as well. When a physical token such as a USB key is used, the user can be unauthenticated if the key is removed from the system. Or, a device with some sort of radio in it, such as bluetooth, can unauthenticate the user if it is removed from the proximity of the system. Unfortunately, user's will likely end up leaving these devices behind, significantly reducing their effectiveness.
As with authentication, unauthentication methods can depend on the sensitivity of the data being protected. Ultimately, though, every system should have some form of automatic unauthentication.
Data security in general can be a difficult nut to crack. System designers are typically either very lax in their security design, often overlooking session security and unauthentication, or they can be very draconian, opting to make the system very secure at the expense of the user. Designing a user-friendly, but secure, system is difficult, at best.
So what is the iPad, exactly? I've been seeing it referred to as merely a gigantic iPod Touch. But is there more to it than that? Is this thing just a glorified iPod, or can there be more there?
On the surface, it truly is an oversized iPod Touch. It has the same basic layout as an iPod Touch with the home button at the bottom. It has a thick border around the screen where the user can hold the unit without interfering with the multitouch display.
The screen itself is an LCD display using IPS technology. According to Wikipedia, IPS (In-Plane Switching) is a technology designed by Hitachi. It offers a wide viewing angle and accurate color reproduction. The screen is backlit using LEDs, offering much longer battery life, uniform backlighting, and longer life.
Apple is introducing a total of 6 units, varying only in the size of the built-in flash storage, and the presence of 3G connectivity. Storage comes in either 16, 32, or 64 GB varieties. 3G access requires a data plan from a participating 3G provider, AT&T to start, and will entail a monthly fee. 3G access will also require the use of a micro-SIM card. AT&T is currently the only US provider using these cards. The base 16GB model will go for $499, while the 64GB 3G model will run you $829, plus a monthly data plan. As it stands now, however, the data plan is on a month by month basis, no contract required.
Ok, so with the standard descriptive details out of the way, what is this thing? Is it worth the money? What is the "killer feature," if there is one?
On the surface, the iPad seems to be just a big iPod Touch, nothing more. In fact, the iPad runs an enhanced version of the iPhone OS, the same OS the iPod Touch runs. Apple claims that most of the existing apps in the iTunes App Store will run on the iPad, both in original size, as well as an enhanced mode that will allow the app to take up the entire screen.
Based on the demonstration that Steve Jobs gave, as well as variousotherreports, there's more to this enhanced OS, though. For starters, it looks like there will be pop-out or drop-down menus, something the current iPhone OS does not have. Additionally, apps will be able to take advantage of file sharing, split screen views, custom fonts, and external displays.
One of the more touted features of the iPad was the inclusion of the iBook store. It seems that Apple wants a piece of the burgeoning eBook market and has decided to approach it just like they approached the music market. The problem here is that the iPad is still a backlit LCD screen at its core. Staring at a backlit display for long periods of time generally leads to headaches and/or eye strain. This is why eInk based units such as the Kindle or the Sony Reader do so well. It's not the aesthetics of the Kindle that people like, it's the comfort of using the unit.
It would be nice to see the eBook market opened up the way the music market has been. In fact, I look forward to the day that the majority of eBooks are available without DRM. Apple's choice of using the ePub format for books is an auspicious one. The ePub format is fast becoming the standard of choice for eBooks and includes support for both a DRM and non-DRM format. Additionally, the format uses standard open formats as a base.
But what else does the iPad offer? Is it just a fancy book reader with some extra multimedia functionality? Or is there something more?
There has been some speculation that the iPad represents more than just an entry into the tablet market. That it, instead, represents an entry into the mobile processor market. After all, Apple put together their own processor, the Apple A4, specifically for this product. So is Apple merely using this as a platform for a launch into the mobile processor market? If so, early reports indicate that they may have something spectacular. Reports from those able to get hands-on time with the iPad report that the unit is very responsive and incredibly fast.
But for all of the design and power behind the iPad, there is one glaring hole. Flash support. And Apple isn't hiding it, either. On stage, during the announcement of the iPad, Steve Jobs demonstrated web browsing by heading to the New York Times homepage. If you've ever been to their homepage, it's dotted by various flash objects with video, slideshows, and more. On the iPad, these shows up as big white boxes with the Safari plugin icon showing.
So what is Apple playing at? Flash is pretty prevalent on the web, so not supporting it will result in a lot of missing content, as one Adobe employee demonstrated. Of course, the iPhone and iPod Touch have the same problem. Or, do they? If a device is popular, developers adapt. This can easily be seen by the number of websites that have adapted to the iPhone. But even more than that, look at the number of sites that adapt to the various web browsers, creating special markup to work with each one. This is nothing new for developers, it happens today.
Flash is unique, though, in that it gives the developers capabilities that don't otherwise exist in HTML, right? Well, not exactly. HTML5 gives developers a standardized way to deploy video, handle offline storage, draw, and more. Couple this with CSS and you can replicate much of what Flash already does. There are lots of examples already of what HTML5 can do.
So what does the iPad truly mean to computing? Will it be as revolutionary as Apple wants us to believe it will be? I'm still not 100% sold on it, but it's definitely something to watch. Microsoft has tried tablets in the past and failed, will Apple succeed?
So what is the iPad, exactly? I've been seeing it referred to as merely a gigantic iPod Touch. But is there more to it than that? Is this thing just a glorified iPod, or can there be more there?
So what is Apple playing at? Flash is pretty prevalent on the web, so not supporting it will result in a lot of missing content, as one Adobe employee demonstrated. Of course, the iPhone and iPod Touch have the same problem. Or, do they? If a device is popular, developers adapt. This can easily be seen by the number of websites that have adapted to the iPhone. But even more than that, look at the number of sites that adapt to the various web browsers, creating special markup to work with each one. This is nothing new for developers, it happens today.
