Salvador Hernandez

Javar Alexander
Eric Haro
CST-373
Prof. Kevin Cahill
10/1/2016
Post 9/11: The Dilution of Privacy
As we move to a more interconnected society, the boundaries of privacy become less
visible. Merriam-Webster defines privacy as the state of being alone and the state of being away
from public attention. However, the issues of privacy have been more focused on online privacy.
The exponential growth of technology has deviated the perspective we have towards privacy,
whether itd be in or out of the digital world. Before social media became popular in 2002,
thanks to Friendster, the thought of posting personal information or photos online was
nonexistent. This uprise in social media changed that mentality, a majority of people now find it
acceptable to post information such as: our occupancies and share family photos, amongst other
personal information. However, this doesnt change the jeopardy that personal information
withholds online.
Different generations have different forms of thought. It is true that there are many values
and morals that get passed along as the newer generation grows and develops. It could not be
more true when it comes to privacy. Our parents generation valued privacy more because they
did not live in an interconnected society as we do now. Even the exchange of a phone number
was something that was held a secret in order to avoid pesky telemarketers. Nowadays, we dont
hesitate to enter our information onto a social media site, and worst of all, some people don't
bother to check their privacy settings and get mad when the information is displayed publicly.
This brings up the issue of how much attention we pay to the services that we sign up for as well
as the values that we hold towards privacy.

The rise in the value of personal information is so high, that it has created a new market
for people or companies to purchase and sell large sums of data. In the CNN article Why big
companies buy, sell your data the author, Jason Morris states, Data is now a $300 billion-ayear industry and employs 3 million people in the United States alone, according to the
McKinsey Global Institute (Morris, 2012). This data could contain email address home
addresses and social security numbers. These transactions of information make us question
legitimate businesses that might be doing illegitimate things behind the scenes. No one likes their
private information to be easily accessible but the way that we interact with others online has
made that information publicly accessible. Sometimes we are in a certain location and we want
our friends to know that we were there, because of this services such as Facebook, and Instagram
has allowed a feature in which you can check-in at a location so that your friends can see that
you were there. Some users might take this feature as something fun and innocent, while others
might take it as another for tracking your movement.
Even the images that are taken with our cell phones store information known as metadata.
Metadata consists of information such as coordinates where the photo was taken, what time it
was taken, it even details as far down as to whether the flash function was used or not. Some
companies even exchange a users search queries, in order to better advertise products that you
have recently searched for. For example, if youre on the hunt to purchase some school supplies
from Amazon, theres a high possibility that the advertisements that appear on your Facebook
page, will be related to school supplies. Bill Tancers book Click is a perfect illustration of the
manipulation of data. Tancer is a data analyst who mentions that a majority of his data comes
from agreements with multiple ISPs throughout the country, anonymizes and aggregates usage
data on more than 7.5 million users. In regards to privacy, he also states, our ISP and opt-in

data partners anonymize and aggregate the data that is sent over to our system to analyze it.
Tancer studies internet behavior such as, upcoming hot internet trends, to which days internet
users commonly visit a porn website (Tancer, 2008) .
Technology develops so rapidly that government policies cannot keep up with them.
Because of this reason, Governments have tried to assess these issues by either implementing
policies that allow them to police certain forms of technology or just disable them altogether.
Unfortunately, a large population of online users cant rely on the governments operational
ethics. As stories of secret cyber wars with other countries have unveiled over the years.
Usually, Internet Privacy refers to private information across the internet but it can be
divided into two categories. In Duncan Langfords book Internet Ethics, he comments on the
distinction between the two forms of Internet Privacy: information privacy and communications
privacy.(2000). Langford himself suggests that these definitions came about before the
information technology era, so their definitions have shifted, but they can still bring about the
different types of privacy based on their names. Information privacy can refer to the information
of the self like name, and last name, whereas communications privacy can refer to the
communications made from one end to the other via email, and messages.
Services such as WhatsApp, and Signal Private Messenger that offer end to end
encryption. This type of encryption encrypts the message to be sent so that no one else has access
to the information sent but the person on the opposite end. On WhatsApps website they state the
following :
WhatsApp's end-to-end encryption ensures only you and the person you're
communicating with can read what is sent, and nobody in between, not even WhatsApp.
Your messages are secured with a lock, and only the recipient and you have the special

key needed to unlock and read your message. For added protection, every message you
send has a unique lock and key. All of this happens automatically: no need to turn on
settings or set up special secret chats to secure your messages.
(WhatsApp Support Team, 2016)
This means that no one can access the information, not the Internet Service Providers (ISP),
WhatsApp, or the Government. It is also important to note that this service comes as an
automatically enabled feature, meaning that as soon as the users start using the service they can
be assured that their privacy is safe. Some people argue that if you have nothing to hide, then
why would you be afraid of someone else looking into your private information? The answer is
hidden within the question itself, its private information. Raymond Wacks, a retired Law
Professor from the University of Hong Kong argued that Privacy is, above all, a concern to
protect sensitive information.(Wacks, 2010) With this said, some Governments have passed
laws that give them access to information with the proper allegations to back them up.
Whenever the death of a human being is the consequence of another human being it is
very emotional and surprising. But the attack on the Twin Towers in New York on September 11,
2001, changed the world. As the news held live coverage on the devastation before and after the
towers dropped, there was also something else that was being live fed, fear and hatred. After the
events of 9/11, there was an increase in crime against people who seemed to resemble a Middle
Easterner. In addition to the crime increase, the government began to change its policies on
things such as immigration and airport rules/regulations. After the attack, people who look like
theyre from the Middle East usually get discriminated against by airport security. Theyre often
pulled to the side and questioned about where they are going and where they have come from or
randomly selected for a search. As a direct result of them resembling a certain ethnic group,

their privacy gets violated. During this post 9/11 era, fear drove the President and the American
people to pass a bill called the Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act was passed as a direct result of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The Patriot act
made a lot of changes to the U.S law. The actual formal name of the bill PATRIOT Act is titled:
Provide Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. There are 10 titles to the Patriot
Act. Title I, authorizes measures to enhance the ability of security forces based out of the USA
to prevent terrorism. This title also created a fund for counter-terrorist activities and increased
existing funding for the Terrorist Screening Center which is run by the FBI. Furthermore, Title I
gave the military authorization to intervene when they believed weapons of mass destruction
were involved. Title 1 also gave authority to openly discriminate against Muslim and Arab
Americans and visitors.
Under Title 1, there also exists Section 205 SEC. 105 referred to as the National
Electronic Crimes Taskforce. It was developed to help prevent counterfeiting and fraud. They
are the ones who are responsible for safeguarding the payment and financial systems of the USA.
The CIA oversees the National Electronic Crimes Taskforce, and with the partnership of the
FBI, they work together to bring counterfeiting criminals to justice. One of the duties in The
National Electronic initiative states the following:
The Director of the United States Secret Service shall take appropriate actions to develop
a national network of electronic crime task forces, based on the New York Electronic
Crimes Task Force model, throughout the United States, for the purpose of preventing,
detecting, and investigating various forms of electronic crimes, including potential
terrorist attacks against critical infrastructure and financial payment systems.
(PATRIOT Act of 2001)

The second title involved more implemented practices that people believed infringed more upon
individual's fourth amendment rights.
Enhanced Surveillance Procedures, also known as Title II, extended on some practices
that were already in place. The government had the right to monitor people who they suspected
of engaging in computer fraud or abuse. These changes being put in place pretty much overwrote
some clauses in FISA and the ECPA.
.and many of the most controversial aspects of the USA PATRIOT Act reside in this
title. In particular, the title allows government agencies to gather "foreign intelligence
information" from both U.S. and non-U.S. citizens and changed FISA to make gaining
foreign intelligence information the significant purpose of FISA-based surveillance,
where previously it had been the primary purpose. ("Top 10 U.S. Government Changes",
2011)
These controversial Title II bill additions were what made it legal for the government to tap into
phone conversations and monitor packet switched networks. Title II also gave the FBI the right
to stored voicemails with a search warrant. Any district judge in the United States could issue
surveillance orders, and search warrants for terrorism investigations.
Title II of the Patriot Act established three very controversial provisions, sneak and
peek warrants, roving wiretaps and the ability of the FBI to gain access to documents
that reveal the patterns of U.S. citizens. (Patriot Act, n.d.)
However, on September 26, 2007, the Sneak Peek provisions were struck down by judge Ann
Aiken, due to the searches violating some of the provisions that prevent unreasonable searches in
the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Section 206 of the PATRIOT act established an
even more controversial privacy infringing policy. Section 206 allows law enforcement agents to

conduct wiretaps without a warrant. The only clause to that was law enforcement agents must
provide at least the name of the suspect and the items that will be monitored.
The Patriot Act enabled authorities to infringe on the personal lives of Muslim-Americans
as well as anyone that looked to be of Middle Eastern descent. In most cases, their actions
infringed on someones individual, family, and spatial privacy. As the title reveals, the book
Patriot Acts: Narratives of Post-9/11 Injustice is a set of narratives of people that have been
needlessly swept up in the War on Terror. The story of Yasir Afif who spent much of his life in
Egypt and who was a student and computer salesman in 2011 stands out because various from of
privacy are infringed as he is being investigated. At some point when he took his car for an oil
change, he saw a tracking device. So by this time he knew that he was being followed, but he
also mentions that when he was being questioned by another FBI agent he felt as if the agent
knew so much of his personal life and stated the following:
She also knew I was looking for a new job. The only way she could have known all this
was either through my phone or email. So, I was 100% sure they didn't only have a
tracking device under my car they also had my phone and email tapped.
(Malek & Korematsu, 2011)
He has to live his life with the sensation that he is being tracked at all times and that his email or
telephone is being monitored. Whats next, telling him where he can and cannot live? These
actions seem to be those that a totalitarian government would partake in.
Many people and institutions including the Cato Institute argued that allowing the law
enforcement agents this kind of power violates people's fourth amendment rights. The Cato
Institute is a public policy research organization. They are a company that is dedicated to the
principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and speech(Cato, n.d). Cato

was founded in 1977, however, the founders of the institute got their ideas from a series of essays
published in the 18th century England. The papers told a tale of a society where the people were
free from overly invasive governments. These series of papers were also the same papers that
inspired the American Revolution. They ultimately believe that social and economic freedom is
not just the best policy for a free people, it is the indispensable framework for the future (Cato,
n.d). Cato and many others are really against the American government spying on its people. Its
a violation of privacy. Many other countries, specifically European countries believe that Privacy
is a basic human right. How privacy is enforced in the United States is viewed as a consumer
protection right. All members of the United Nations (UN) are in agreement to follow a set of
standards. On the UNs Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the following is stated:
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or
correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to
the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. (The United Nations, 1948,
art. 12)
The matter is not whether or not the members of the UN uphold these, rather how they interpret
them.
In Europe, three Google executives were sentenced to serve 6 months in prison (Liptak,
2010). The Italian government held these people responsible for not deleting a video quick
enough that showed an autistic boy being bullied by other students. The video was only up for
about two months. Furthermore, as a result of the European views of privacy, these Google
executives were actually held accountable. This supports their idea that privacy is a basic human
right. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that Everyone has the right
to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence (Liptak, 2010).

Anyone who is caught infringing upon someone's basic human rights will have to face the
consequences. These privacy views are similar to Americas but they differ when it comes to
privacy with respect to family life and home life. Americans view privacy mainly as being free
and protected against the government being too invasive. European countries place more
emphasis on protecting peoples personal information and keeping it private. Although Europe
places a stronger emphasis on personal privacy, the three Google executives had their jail time
dropped.
In Etzionis book, The Limits of Privacy, the author states how there has been a lot of
attention around privacy, but not to what he refers to as hyper-privacy which he defines it to be
an advanced form of encryption that protects the secrecy of the communications involved.
(Etzioni, 1999, p.75) Since the book was published before the Patriot Act and before the internet
effectively connected the worlds data, it is interesting to see how what we deem as the standard
for communication privacy to be what Etzioni referred to as Hyper-privacy. As previously
mentioned this is the type of encryption that WhatsApp offers to its users, but that does not
necessarily mean that the information will never be accessed because, in August of 2016, they
announced that they would be sharing some information with their parent company, Facebook.
On August 31st, 2016, The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) whose motto reads
defending your rights in the digital world reported that WhatsApp was going to begin sharing
some data with their parent company, Facebook.(Gebhart, 2016) Upon the discovery of this new
section under the service agreements, WhatsApp stated that the information passed along was to
be used to be used to improve Facebooks ads and product experiences. This goes contrary to the
existence of end to end encryption itself because it was primarily meant so that no one could
access the information unless they were the person the communication was for. Strictly speaking,

10

they are not selling the data because it is just passed on, but would there be a more tumultuous
reaction if WhatsApp did not belong to Facebook and the data was being sold? Also, their
intentions indicate that the data would be used so that the users can have better product
experiences. One way to interpret this would be that they would be using the data to be more
effective in targeting ads. Even with this downfall, they still have a platform that offers data
security, but what happens when the government or an authority figure asks a company to
provide access an account without authorization?
After the Patriot Act, the rate of vigilance rose and with it came many questions and
worried Americans. This is why end to end encryption should be the norm. And not only should
this apply for messaging services, it should be established all across the technology spectrum.
Digital information should be treated as a physical object in which the owner of it choose to take
it out of their pocket to show the information or not. This is one of the downsides of the
interconnected world. These described issues follow along with the following concerns:
Should public authorities have the capability to decipher encrypted messages? Will public
safety be seriously hampered if public authorities are unable to do so? What is the main
source of danger to the public the eavesdropping state(Big Brother) or the Criminal
Element that uses hyper-encryption? Can privacy (which encryption helps protect) and
the common good (including national security and domestic peace) be reconciled, at least
in part, by limiting the conditions and situations in which encrypted messages may be
deciphered by public authorities? (Etzioni, 1999)
Encryption can help to protect against the eavesdropping state, but it can also help to protect
criminals. So how private should online privacy be? If unwanted information is exposed, it can

11

endanger the individual, family, and spatial privacy of the individual. Thats why it is so
important.
The post 9/11 era of American policies towards security has divided Americans because
on one side people agree that, the increased surveillance can help to spot potential threats, but on
the opposite side it could endanger peoples private information. Given the natural activities of
the NSA, they must have access to powerful tools that would be dangerous if they were to be
misplaced. Unfortunately, thats what ended up happening to a set of Hacking Tools. One would
assume that their operatives and contractors would be highly trained sand would spare no
expensive when disposing of their tools, but that was not the case in this situation. According to
the Reuters article by Joseph Menn and John Walcott,
NSA officials have told investigators that an employee or contractor made the mistake
about three years ago during an operation that used the tools, the people said. That person
acknowledged the error shortly afterward, they said. But the NSA did not inform the
companies of the danger when it first discovered the exposure of the tools, the sources
said.(2016)
The situation alone already puts the NSA in a tight spot, but the following excerpt from the same
report suggests the malicious byproduct that can come from these types of operations.
Representatives of the NSA, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the office of the
Director of National Intelligence all declined to comment. After the discovery, the NSA
tuned its sensors to detect use of any of the tools by other parties, especially foreign
adversaries with strong cyber espionage operations, such as China and Russia. That could
have helped identify rival powers hacking targets, potentially leading them to be
defended better. It might also have allowed U.S officials to see deeper into rival hacking

12

operations while enabling the NSA itself to continue using the tools for its own
operations. (Menn & Walcott, 2016)
The NSA chose to not let the people and companies know of the exposure of the hacking tools so
that they could monitor potential threats if they chose to use those tools. This action suggests that
they support the idea of reducing privacy to increase security.
In early 2016 Apple made a stance against the reduction of privacy to increase security
when they did not follow the FBI's order to provide a tool to unlock a phone for a legal case. One
of the main reasons why we have become such an interconnected society is the availability of
smartphones. So many of us have become very dependent on it that we can't imagine life before
their existence. These devices not only store private information of the person using it, it also
stores private information of other people as well because the user could have phone numbers
and emails of other people synced to the phone. On December 2, 2015, there was a mass
shooting in San Bernardino, CA in which 14 people died.(Almasy, 2015) As part of the
investigation, the FBI obtained work phone from one of the shooters. The phone was an iPhone
5c, an apple product, that had security features that did not allow it to be broken into to obtain
information. Because of this reason, the FBI turned to Apple and asked them to create a tool to
disable certain security features so the phone could be accessed. Apple had to make an ethical
decision to create a tool that would disable security features and help out in the investigation or
stand their ground on behalf of the privacy that their products provide. Shortly after the request
was made and denied, Apples CEO, released a Customer Letter that addressed the San
Bernardino shooting and the security features of their devices. This is what he had to say about
their device encryption:

13

Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal
safety at risk. That is why encryption has become so important to all of us. For many
years, we have used encryption to protect our customers personal data because we
believe its the only way to keep their information safe. We have even put that data out of
our own reach because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business.
(Cook, 2016)
Here Cook emphasized the commitment that they have to the privacy of iPhone users, but in the
following excerpt, he states why Apple did not want to create the one specific tool to disable
security features.
Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system,
circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered
during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software which does not exist today
would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someones physical possession.
(Cook, 2016)
By not creating the tool, they are safeguarding the privacy of iPhone users. This was one of the
primary concerns that Apple had regarding this issue, the other was that of the precedent their
actions would have. In an article by the National Public Radio (NPR), Alina Selyukh and Naomi
Lachance stated that the matter was ultimately a dispute over precedent that would define the
scope that the government could have when dealing with uncooperative tech companies when
trying to access encrypted information.(2016) Privacy should not be compromised on behalf of
security.
We firmly believe that privacy should be a basic human right. We do not think its
acceptable that some companies track your online habits, physical location or even the data you

14

send across LAN/WAN networks. We do not believe it is ethical to change prices of goods or
services based on of their physical location or internet data stored on their computer, or the type
of hardware that is inside of their computer. We do not believe that it ethical or acceptable for the
government or its agencies to monitor people without their consent unless they are a threat to
national security.
Technology has done nothing but challenge privacy in our opinion. It is great, dont get
us wrong and We love it, but it has been the center of controversy lately, with computer systems
being hacked, information being stolen, privacy being put at risk all due to technology. Although
the basic principles of social media are great, We think it had some unintended issues arise as use
went up. Social Media sites such as Facebook and Twitter often have users that publish very
private information about themselves to the public. In their terms of use all of this is explained
but no one really takes the time to read through all of it.
Although it seems like technology has pushed us a few steps back in regards to privacy,
many social media outlets have been trying to address those concerns. In order to combat the
onslaught of privacy issues, social media outlets are starting to change their privacy practices and
making privacy settings more transparent to the user. We now have control who we share that
information with dependent on the social media outlet. Furthermore, you can delete profiles and
delete archives of your data in certain circumstances. Many companies are pouring monetary
resources into creating a safe social media environment by increasing security and by fostering
security research and development for this young technology. However, this has been happening
more and more in recent times, I still feel like everyone should watch out and know what
information theyre sharing and where its going. There are good intentions with social media
outlets trying to keep our information safe, though in our opinion there will always be people

15

who want to steal that information you are trying to keep safe. If you want that information to
remain private, moral of the story: dont share it on the internet. Once its there, its next to
impossible to get it removed. To some extent, once the information is on the internet, it no longer
belongs to us because we will not be able to remove it anymore.
At the end of the day, it is up to that person to share all that information. It is still up to
every individual to their keep private information private. It is my fundamental belief that
everyone has a right to privacy. However, it is their responsibility to know how/where their
information is being stored and how its being used. It seems like the internet, in general, played
a huge role in the destruction of individual's privacy. With these issues becoming more and more
apparent and gaining popularity, privacy issues are starting to make people worrisome. I believe
that making people think twice about what information theyre putting on the internet is a great
thing for their safety and privacy.

16

References
About Cato. (n.d.). Retrieved October 16, 2016, from http://www.cato.org/about
Cato was one of the biggest activists against the PATRIOT Act in the United States. Cato
is a public policy research company that thinks that the government should take a step
back on surveillance practices.
Cook, T. (2016, February 16). Customer Letter - Apple. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/
This open letter from apple goes and talks about encryption and the need for keeping our
information safe. This letter came after the FBI approached apple to hack into or reverse
engineer a terrorist iPhone. Apple refused to give the FBI such tool because it would put
their users privacy at risk.
Etzioni, A. (1999). The limits of privacy. New York: Basic Books.
Privacy is believed to be one of the most the most respected American rights, however,
with the invention of new technology, many people are worried that this will start to
infringe upon our right to privacy.
Gebhart, B. G. (2016, August 31). What Facebook and WhatsApp's Data Sharing Plans Really
Mean for User Privacy. Retrieved October 11, 2016, from
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/08/what-facebook-and-whatsapps-data-sharing-plans-reallymean-user-privacy-0

17

WhatsApp is now sharing your data metrics about messages, photos, voice, and video
data. WhatsApp will be sharing this data with their parent company Facebook. The new
integration will share data between Facebook profiles and WhatsApp profiles. Facebook,
the parent company states that this is so your Facebook ad experience is improved.
H.R. 3162, 107 Cong.(2001) (enacted).
Anti-terrorism bill that was enacted after 9/11. This bill intends on unifying and making
America stronger by providing tools to actively fight terrorism. The bill has ten titles
which go into more detail about the Anti-terrorism bill, and how they are going to keep
terrorism out of the country.
Jason Morris and Ed Lavandera. (August 23, 2012). Why big companies buy, sell your data
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/tech/web/big-data-acxiom/
Big companies buy and sell your data in order to help consumers. They believe this will
help consumers by allowing them to customize your ad experience. This keeps spam out
of our inboxes. Acxiom is described to be one of the biggest companies youve never
heard of.
Langford, D. (2000). Internet Ethics. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Internet Ethics looks at the difficult issues that are facing internet users. They go into
detail with topics such as censorship, data protection, and security. The book looks
examine these issues from a global perspective versus a local issue.
Liptak, A. (2010, February 27). When American and European Ideas of Privacy Collide.
Retrieved October 14, 10, from
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/weekinreview/28liptak.html
This article looks at privacy but from a European perspective and an American
perspective. Its interesting because Americans and Europeans have different ideas when

18

it comes to privacy. Europe firmly believes that privacy should be a basic human right,
but Americas views differ.
Malek, A., & Korematsu, K. (2011). Patriot acts Narratives of post-9/11 injustice. San Francisco:
McSweeneys Books.
This book tells stories about the people who have been fighting the war on terror. The
book intends to give the people a voice whove had their human rights violated in the
USA. It focuses on young men and women who are middle-eastern descent, who have
been wrongly interrogated. Additionally, it focuses on the discrimination specifically
against woman as a result of them wearing head coverings.
Menn, J., & Walcott, J. (2016, September 22). Exclusive: Probe of leaked U.S. NSA hacking
tools examines operative's 'mistake' Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cyber-nsa-tools-idUSKCN11S2MF
A set of tools which was leaked shows exploits in computer and communication systems.
These set of tools were apparently used by the NSA in order to snoop on civilians and
criminals. The tool was dumped on a bunch of public websites for people to see. U.S
officials that Russian officials had used these tools to hack political party organizations.
Patriot Act. (n.d.). Retrieved October 15, 2016, from
http://sfdsfdfgdgd.blogspot.com/2015/06/patriot-act.html
The article talks about the Patriot act which was passed after 9/11. The Patriot Acts
formal name is Uniting and Strengthen America by Providing Appropriate Tools
Required to Interpret and obstruct terrorism was signed into law on October 26 , 2001.
th

This new law was so controversial at the time because the government now had more
surveillance power over the people of the USA.

19

Selyukh, A., & Lachance, N. (2016, March 15). Apple On FBI iPhone Request: 'The Founders
Would Be Appalled' Retrieved October 16, 2016, from http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwoway/2016/03/15/470436785/apple-on-fbi-iphone-request-the-founders-would-be-appalled
This article from NPR talks about how the founding fathers would be Appalled if they
were around today to see how the government is operating today specifically with the
privacy violations. The FBI wanted Apple to create software that would allow them to
unlock anyones iPhone, and bypass all the security settings on the phone, but apple
denied the request.
The Investigative Mission. (n.d.). Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
http://www.secretservice.gov/investigation/
The website gives more details about the mission of the secret service, and their role
keeping our country safe. The Secret Service keeps this information secure by monitoring
individuals and acting quickly when our nations security or infrastructure is threatened.
The United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
A history making human rights document that established the basic human rights across
the board for everyone regardless of the individuals origin.
Top 10 U.S. Government Changes Since 9/11 | 9/11 and Ground Zero. (2011, September 08).
Retrieved October 16, 2016, from http://beforeitsnews.com/9-11-and-ground-zero/2011/09/top10-u-s-government-changes-since-911-1066695.html
Some of the top 10 changes since 9/11 were shocking. Since 9/11 music and televisions
censorship starting taking place. What is believed to be the most controversial to the list
is the government's new surveillance plans details.

20

W. (n.d.). WhatsApp FAQ - End-to-End Encryption. Retrieved October 09, 2016, from
https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/en/general/28030015
This article that is on WhatsApp FAQ talks about privacy and security. In the article,
WhatsApp states that all their messages, photos, and videos that are sent are encrypted.
All this information is encrypted to keep those out who dont have access to your
information. In order to decrypt this data and view it, you have to be the intended
recipient or have the intended recipients WhatsApp account information.
Wacks, R. (2010). Privacy: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wacks defines what privacy is and talks about how it is currently under attack. With
electronic surveillance, online security, encryption, the interception of email and the
monitoring of employees raises questions about our privacy practices.