Personal and Private Information Exposures and Opportunities - Literature review Example

(school) Personal and private information exposures and opportunities The internet has become a worldwide and pervasive phenomenon. It has infiltrated most aspects of people’s lives and it has become an indispensable part of communication, of socialization, and of general work activities. Social networking has also become an essential part of our daily communication activities, with most individuals having Facebook and/or Twitter accounts and sharing private information to the general public. This paper shall discuss how private and personal information is often made available on the web and how it provides opportunities for exposures. It will discuss these concerns from the perspective of protecting personal rights. The rights of companies to share information will also be discussed and the rights to have private information protected shall also be considered in this discussion. How credit agencies often skate the thin lines in privacy shall be another aspect of this paper. Case studies and measures supporting the position taken will also be presented. This paper is being carried out in order to provide a clear and well-supported discussion on rights of privacy in the current age of pervasive socialization activities. Private and personal information are now available through various access points in the internet – via social networking sites, online sales transactions, and even membership in organizations (Boyd and Heer). However, private and personal information expose individuals to various illegal internet activities including internet fraud, identity theft, harassment, phishing and similar activities. Through social networking sites alone, personal information is often available to the public and to the user’s friends (Chiaramonte and Martinez, 6). Information like the name, birth date, address, phone number, and occupation, including photos and locations are information which are often needed by opportunistic individuals wanting to carry out internet frauds, phishing, credit card frauds, and identity theft (Chiaramonte and Martinez, 6). The fact that many users often do not modify their privacy settings in their Facebook and Twitter accounts make them vulnerable to violations of their privacy and other illegal internet activities. Networking sites, especially Facebook have come under fire for its failure to protect the privacy of its users (Coppola, et.al., 95). At one point, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was severely criticized for stating that ‘privacy was dead.’ This belief epitomizes Zuckerberg lackadaisical concern for user privacy in Facebookl this would also explain why features to protect user’s privacy were not immediately laid out from the very start (Public Policy and Management). It took years and a significant amount of pressure and backlash from the social networking community for Facebook to finally relent to the installation of tighter privacy options for users. At one point, Facebook even admitted that it made the email addresses of their users available to various organizations and corporations (Lampe, et.al., 167). This practice has since been stopped by the popular social networking site. Despite the privacy settings now made available to Facebook and social network users, there still are risks to the exposure of the privacy of these users (Hass, 30). For one, there is still no guarantee that the social networking sites are not releasing user information to corporations for the right price. Moreover, the failure of users in utilizing the privacy features is also an issue which does not guarantee privacy and protection of users (Stutzman). Some users in Facebook are not aware that their social activities and other internet activities are often being tracked and posted in Facebook. Many websites now ask users or readers whether they are reading as Facebook users, and not knowing the implications of agreeing to Yes/No dialogue boxes, these users often just tick Yes and from then, all the articles they read, the videos they watch, and the comments they make online are being tracked and posted in their Facebook page (Dwyer). What makes the situation worse is that their activities are often not visible to them, but is visible to their “friends.” In these instances, the opinions, likes, preferences, and other activities are often made known to their friends. Considering that most Facebook users often bloat the number of their friends by adding even those they are merely acquainted with, their activities are often made known to those who may not have the best intentions (Stutzman). Posting real-time locations has also become an added feature for many social networking sites, and through this feature, internet users often inform their friends about where they are, what they are doing, and who they are with (Public Policy Management). In these instances, private moments at private locations are no longer private. For the more gregarious individuals, they often enjoy discussing their activities with friends, however, they often do not realize the implications of their actions. They do not realize that while they may be out of their house, their house is open to burglaries. Malicious intent from other individuals can also be easily carried out when those who intend to do them harm know where to find them. Private and personal information made available in the internet has also provided opportunities and exposures for users. Email addresses are often one of the most public information which can be used for internet fraud (Read, 120). Since social networks and internet sites often require their users to post their email addresses, these addresses often become available to a wider set of people, especially those who are seeking opportunities to perpetuate illegal activities (Read, 120). Through email addresses SPAM or scam mails by sites posing as their banks and wanting them to verify their personal information, including their social security numbers. Such information is all the data needed to carry out internet fraud schemes as credit card theft (Read, 120). Various corporations often establish deals with social networking sites and other organizations in order to gain access to email addresses of users. In fact, one of the most common and accepted practices is the selling of email addresses to corporations. The corporations then send SPAM to these email addresses, inviting customers and enticing them to become members or to share pertinent personal information (Mintz, B1). Corporations have also used supermarket loyalty cards in order to track the personal purchasing habits of users, and such information can later be used by companies in shifting and shaping shopper experience (Schweizer, et.al.). Arrangements are often established with data compilers and mailing list companies where companies purchase and collect data from government records, phone books, consumer surveys, product registration forms and similar other sources in order to establish links with consumers (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse). For marketing purposes, including advertisements and customer tracking systems, companies often gain access to pertinent customer data. The rights of individuals to be protected from these activities have not been firmly set by the government. Although internet protection legislation has been carried out by the lawmakers, these laws have not been specific enough in their prohibitions and protection of internet users and corporate activities (Mayer, et.al., 709). For one, these laws prohibit internet fraud and internet phishing, but they do not specifically prevent data compiling practices often applied by various companies. There are also no laws which prevent companies from copying the email addresses of users which are seen in public and then to flood these emails with SPAM (Mayer, et.al., 709). In some regard, businesses often cannot be blamed when the internet users often fail to use internet security options, especially when they make their email addresses easily accessible to most everyone using the internet (Goodhue, et.al., 3). Moreover, making one’s address, phone number, and other pertinent information public comes at a great price for many users, and sadly, many of these users are unaware of their vulnerabilities (Read, 121). In some cases, it is only after they become spammed, scammed, or become victims of identity theft and fraud that they realize how vulnerable they have made themselves. Failure of individuals to safeguard their privacy may be the primary cause of their internet vulnerabilities and it is often difficult to draw the line between valid and illegal corporate activities, especially when internet users fail to use internet security options (Read, 121). For credit card companies, internet users through online transactions are especially vulnerable to the loss of privacy because users are often prompted to reveal their information to the websites where they are making their purchase (Metzger, 4). Through internet transactions, hackers and ‘phish-ers’ often use the data available on the internet and charge additional purchases on the customer’s card. With more transactions carried out online, the customers become more vulnerable to the dangers of illegal sales and internet fraud. Although many legitimate companies have secured measures in order to ensure their customer privacy, the digital footprints for these transactions are still open to these companies (Dwyer, et.al., 3). Through digital footprints, transactions can be traced and consumer information can then be sent to the customers in order to further entice them into purchasing more. Aside from economic activities, current internet use has become less private and basically, internet stalking has become a common practice, both among friends and other acquaintances (Schrobsdorff). Now, it has become easy for internet users to stalk and spy on each other. News Feeds on social networking sites have made it easy for people to track the activities of their friends. News Feeds seem to indicate all user activities even on pictures or comments they make on the walls of their friends (Schrobsdorff). The fact that it is easy for the younger population to be members of social sites is also another point of issue for many companies. Although the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act indicates that no child under 13 shall be able to use the sites, many children are often to circumvent these policies and use the sites (Public Policy Management). These children have less maturity and discernment about internet use and they may not be as guarded about their privacy. In these instances, they are even more vulnerable than their adult counterparts to internet fraud, and worse, cyberstalking, and similar criminal activities (Public Policy Management). Moreover, these below 13 children may also be vulnerable to the whims of child sexual predators. Under these conditions, internet privacy has suffered a significant blow and similar vulnerabilities. The above discussion indicates how internet privacy has been changed by social networking activities. Social networking has opened people to the dangers of internet scams, phishing, fraud, cyberstalking, cyber bullying, and identity theft. Failure of users to secure their privacy has made them very much open to the above dangers; moreover, companies have also taken on the practice of buying and obtaining consumer information through the internet and sending email advertisements to these companies. Under these conditions, internet privacy has become very much vulnerable and has become difficult to secure, especially because everything these days is online. Nevertheless, for individuals, using the security options to protect privacy must be utilized as much as possible. Moreover, strict legislation must be carried out specifically punishing acts which compromise the privacy of users. Works Cited Boyd, D. and Heer, J. “Profiles as Conversation: Networked Identity Performance on Friendster.” 2006. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, Hawaii, HICSS-39. Print. Chiaramonte, P. and Martinez, E. “Jerks In Space,” in The New York Post (2006), pp. 6. Print. Coppola, N., Hiltz, S., Rotter, N. “Building Trust in Virtual Teams.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 47. 2 (2004): pp. 95-104. Print. Dwyer, C. “Digital Relationships in the 'MySpace' Generation: Results From a Qualitative Study.” Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, 2007. Print. Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S., and Passerini, K. “Trust and Privacy Concern Within Social Networking Sites: A Comparison of Facebook and MySpace. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Keystone, Colorado, 2007. Print. Goodhue, D. Klein, D. and March, S. “User evaluations of IS as surrogates for objective performance,” Journal of Information Management, 38. 2 (2000). Hass, N. “In Your Facebook.com,” The New York Times (2006): pp. 30-31. New York. Print. Lampe, C., Ellison, N. Steinfield, C. “A face(book) in the crowd: Social searching versus social browsing.” Proceedings of the 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Banff, Alberta, Canada, (2007): 167-170. Print. Mayer, R., Davis, J., Schoorman, F. “An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust.” The Academy of Management Review, 20. 3 (1995): pp. 709-734. Print. Metzger, M. “Privacy, Trust, and Disclosure: Exploring Barriers to Electronic Commerce” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9.4 (2004). Print. Mintz, J. “Friendster's 'Eww' Moment,” in The Wall Street Journal, 2005): B1. Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. Junk Mail: How Did They All Get My Address?. Accessed 13 August 2012. Web. Public Policy Management. “Unwitting Exposure: Does Posting Personal Information Online Mean Giving Up Privacy?”. (2006). Web. Read, B. “Think Before You Share: Students' online socializing can have unintended consequences,” in Chronicle of Higher Education. Washington, DC, 2006. Print. Schrobsdorff, S. “Predators Playground?,” in Newsweek, January 27, 2006. Print. Schweizer, K. Leimeister, J. Krcmar, H. “The role of virtual communities for the social network of cancer patients.” Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico, 2006. Print. Stutzman, F. (2006) “Student Life on the Facebook.” Accessed 13 August 2012. Web. Read More