วันเสาร์ที่ 8 มิถุนายน พ.ศ. 2556

Silicon Valley tech companies in uncomfortable spotlight over surveillance reports

While key details remained shrouded in secrecy Friday, this week's disclosures about a clandestine government program for tracking Internet users has placed some of Silicon Valley's biggest tech companies in an uncomfortable spotlight.


Apple, Facebook, Google and Yahoo have all denied initial reports that they gave the government wholesale access to their servers. But U.S. officials confirmed the existence of a program focused on accessing the online activity of people outside the United States, as authorized by a secretive national security court, and critics said the program could easily pull in information about U.S. users as well.


Experts warn that the government program known as Prism will make it more




An illustration picture shows the logo of the U.S. National Security Agency on the display of an iPhone in Berlin on June 7, 2013. The debate over whether the U.S. government is violating citizens' privacy rights while trying to protect them from terrorism escalated dramatically Thursday amid reports that authorities have collected data on millions of phone users and tapped into servers at nine internet companies. (Pawel Kopczynski/Reuters)



difficult for the companies to maintain consumer trust and expand their business both here and overseas, in an industry that depends on consumers' willingness to share intimate details of their lives online -- via emails, photos, Internet voice calls or even the websites they visit.


 


"These companies are trying to expand in markets around the world. Whatever assurances the government is giving to U.S. citizens, imagine if you were living in Brazil or India. I don't see how this isn't going to hurt," said Irina Raicu, who runs the Internet program at Santa Clara University's Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.


The disclosures are likely to make U.S. consumers more wary, as well, experts said. Internet users generally expect that




Advertisement

 



the companies to which they are entrusting their data will use or exploit it in some commercial way, said David Aaker, vice chairman of Prophet, a San Francisco marketing firm. But he added that giving that data to a third party, such as the government, is "frightening" to many people.


 


Industry leaders also worry the program could undercut the positions that Google and other companies have taken in resisting demands for information by autocratic regimes around the world, according to one executive who insisted on anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak on the subject.


Other Internet executives expressed frustration, both with what they called distorted news coverage and with government secrecy requirements that they said made it difficult to discuss the issue.


"The level of secrecy around the current legal procedures undermines the freedoms we all cherish," Google CEO Larry Page said in a blog post co-signed by his company's chief legal officer, David Drummond.


"We provide user data to governments only in accordance with the law," Page added. "Press reports that suggest that Google is providing open-ended access to our users' data are false, period."


In a separate statement, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg denounced what he called "the outrageous press reports about Prism." While Facebook also complies with legal demands for user information, he said, the company has never received a "blanket request" for that information, "and if we did, we would fight it aggressively."


Details of the program remained murky. Initial reports in The Washington Post and The Guardian, a British newspaper, said Thursday that nine leading Internet companies were voluntarily giving U.S. security agencies direct access to company servers. But the Post suggested Friday that the access may have involved sending requests through other equipment, while The Wall Street Journal cited sources who said the government gets copies of data but doesn't have direct access to the companies' computers.


In a statement, National Intelligence Director James Clapper said the articles contained unspecified inaccuracies, and that the program was authorized under a section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.


That law allows U.S. agencies to obtain information on "non-U.S. persons" once the agencies have obtained general approval for the program from the little-known Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. With that approval, the government has broad authority to demand all kinds of information about foreign individuals, without specific warrants, provided they meet certain criteria, according to Marc Zwillinger, a Washington-based attorney who advises tech companies on government information demands.


Because that information might include Internet communications between foreigners and U.S. citizens, the government could also gain access to information from U.S. citizens' accounts, said Brett Kaufman, a national security expert with the American Civil Liberties Union.


Zwillinger said the law, which has been challenged and upheld in court, gives companies no choice about complying with requests. He added that he believes Congress should reconsider giving federal agencies such broad discretion.


While the companies say they are obliged to comply with legal demands, others say the government needs companies to cooperate and provide technical assistance to process the requests smoothly.


Companies that face other types of government scrutiny have felt pressured to go along with programs like Prism, said the industry official who spoke on condition of anonymity. Google, Microsoft and other companies named as providing information under the Prism program have all faced government regulatory investigations on antitrust and consumer privacy issues in recent years.


Because the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court operates in secret, with no opportunity for the public to have input, a company facing a demand for information "has minimal interest in pushing back and typically doesn't," said Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.


Page said Google reviews every government demand for information "and frequently pushes back when requests are overly broad or don't follow the correct process."


The Washington Post reported that Twitter, which has fought other government demands, doesn't participate in the Prism program; Twitter did not respond to requests for comment.


Some privacy advocates said the Internet companies' own practices may invite government interest. The companies collect vast amounts of user data and retain it for long periods in formats that make it easy to tie the information to individual users, "which is why the government wants access to it," Rotenberg said.

ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:

แสดงความคิดเห็น