--- To: declanat_private From: Peter Wayner <pcwat_private> Subject: letter to politech or news or whomever Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:27:11 -0500 Declan-- Thanks for writing about _Translucent Databases_ in your column. It's a honor to be discussed in one of best places where politics and technology meet at an equal level. I've already gotten several nice letters filled with ideas so thanks to your readers. I think your piece was spot on, but it was only half the story. Technology _can_ help curb big brother surveillance by cloaking our movements with mathematics. Businesses that want to protect their customers privacy will want to look at solutions like you described. The field of cryptography is big and filled with mathematical puzzle boxes to fit many needs. I hope proactive businesses will follow your lead and start looking at the possibilities. Unfortunately, I think that many won't because defending privacy is often portrayed as protecting shifty-eyed strangers who are just one step away from terrorism. This is really the wrong approach. Privacy and security go hand in hand. Protecting people's data helps protect them. Consider my favorite example from a book: a website that helps parents find babysitters by keeping a central schedule. Parents looking for a sitter can go to a website and find out who is free on Friday with one click and no phone tag. This sounds like a very useful service, but it's fraught with danger because this database contains the schedule of babysitters _and_ parents who won't be home. It would be terrible if a database was abused by hackers, insiders, or both. In this case, a translucent database can help the parents without keeping personal information. There are many examples like this when privacy and security go hand in hand. I've always felt that the book, _Translucent Databases_, will find more of an audience in the intelligence community than the world of privacy defenders and cypherpunks. The intelligence community just has more sensitive data to guard from prying eyes both within and without the fold. If the FBI was infiltrated by a Russian spy and the Pentagon was penetrated by a Cuban spy, perhaps we have to worry about a terrorist sneaking into the TIA databases. The cypherpunks always get these things first, but I'm hoping that their enthusiasm won't scare away the people who cleave to the aegis of government. There are also practical reasons why businesses may want to choose such a solution. Subpoenas are also a tax on people who keep good records. The shipping companies like FedEx have entire divisions devoted to answering calls from law enforcement and the courts. It's not just spies defending the realm either-- divorce lawyers love to poke around for evidence. A business that keeps the records must also spend the costs to answer questions. Thanks again for writing about the topic. I wanted to highlight these aspects of the debate in case anyone was actually thinking about making technology like this illegal. The math is always neutral and, in this case, it can serve both the interests of the radical libertarians and the folks who want to build good, secure government systems. --Peter For info about the book: http://www.wayner.org/books/td/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Dec 22 2002 - 11:43:06 PST