Social Networking Sites in the US - Research Paper Example

Law and the Internet Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code and Name: University: Date of Submission: Law and the Internet Introduction Before launching into discussing the major issues of the topic, it is imperative that this paper sets out, through definition, certain very critical terms. The terms to be defined include social networking site, upload and security. This is in order to give the discussion the requisite grounding and put it in perspective. The first term to be considered is security which may be understood as those things which are done so as to keep either a person, country or any other thing for that matter, safe from any danger or crime.1 Variously, the term may also be understood as the state or condition of a person of a thing being secure from any danger or attack.2 From these foregoing definitions, it can thus be deduced that used within the context of this paper, the term Internet security would refer to the state of ensuring that the personal information available on the Internet is made secure so that the same does not become subject of unnecessary interference. The next term to be considered is the concept of uploading which refers to the process by which information is transferred from a non-networked computer onto the network so that the same information may become available to other people who can then not only see it but also use it.3 A social networking site on its part may be understood as referring to an Internet-based service which enables several people to share information of common interests and or experiences.4 A social networking site is important to users because it saves the users the trouble of having to interact directly through point-to-point forms of communication such as face to face, phone or text. Instead a social networking site allows its community of users to post information which can then be accessed and read later by the other users. Once the information is posted, the users to whom the said information had been posted can then be able to follow the postings and respond by providing relevant comments.5 In a nutshell therefore, a social networking site enables its community of users to connect with each other so as to be able to share information as well as ideas.6 Some of the most common examples of the social networking sites include twitter, Netlog, Facebook and MySpace just to mention but a few examples. Today, one of the most critical challenges comes from the global developments in the information and communication technology, ICT.7 The process of information transfer between people at different points and states in the world remains one of the driving forces of globalization. While information access and exchange between various people and points is not a new phenomenon, the present challenges that it poses brings near insurmountable challenges, especially with regard to the world of information opportunities that is presented via the Internet as a mass medium.8 While the exponential growth in the mass media, especially through the Internet is good news owing to the readily available information and is thus not bad per se, there are certain sublime nuances that come with such readily available information. The most conspicuous of these is the concept of access of information uploaded onto the social networking sites.9 Let me set the record straight from the outset that these social networking sites play very indispensable roles in facilitating the human natural instinct of socialization. However, it is to be pointed out that these sites are double edged swords that could harm people in much the same way that they assist them. The biggest danger that comes with the sites concerns the security of the information about the people which are uploaded onto their sites. A number of security concerns have been identified as being very common to social networking sites. The most common of these include the following; The first crucial problem that is common with the Social Networking Sites is their operations’ security, otherwise known as OPSEC.10 Security operatives point out the fact that social networking is inherent with information exchange among the users and makes the said users trust each other. Consequently, the information that are posted or uploaded by the users to be shared by their friends cease being private hence becomes public. In fact, there are no exceptions as to the information becoming public, notwithstanding the strength of any privacy settings held by the Social Networking Site.11 The moment such information, like such personal information as home address, birthday dates etc is posted or uploaded and the same becomes public, it becomes available to everyone who may access the network. The inherent danger in this therefore is that the same may be used by stalkers, thieves, hackers, enemy organizations or terrorists and such other kinds of people to monitor and cause harm to people. Thus, it may be seen that the social networking sites carry with them intrinsic danger to each of the community of users at any point in the world. A second major problem is what has been described as the Cross-Site Scripting, otherwise abbreviated as XSS. XSS refers to the kinds of attacks which involve code injecting usually as a browser-side script. This has been noted to arise when a social networking site allows its users to post their comments in plaintext, in HTML or in active content. In the circumstance that the said postings are infected, the corresponding user’s web browser may then end up performing various non intended operations which could even include downloading viruses, surfing to a malicious website and in the worst of situations, it may cause a denial of service to the user.12 A third possible danger that comes with Social Networking Sites is the likelihood of impersonation.13 There is an inherent danger that any third party who is not well meaning may access the account of any other user through such unorthodox procedures as hacking. Once the third party gains access into such sites, they may then be able to impersonate the legitimate account holder so as to be able to obtain any kind of information from the legitimate account holder’s community of friends. This carries with it a lot of security risks to both the legitimate account holder as well as their community of friends. Another security danger that comes with social networking is the likelihood of accessing malicious content from the networks.14 This comes in circumstances such as where the Social Networking is the type that allows its community of users to share information from multimedia content. The information from such content has the potential to contain certain malicious codes which may make the user’s browser to download viruses or sometimes end up performing unintended operations under the correct circumstances.15 Suffice it to say therefore that Social Networking Sites pose very real and serious security challenges as well as threats to the community of users wherever they are in the world. Taking cognizance of these security challenges that lie in wait to millions of unsuspecting users of Social Networking Sites, a number of governments the world over have put in place legislations to ensure that the Social Networking Sites users have their security concerns taken care of. Of the various countries to put in place such legislations is Australia. It is now proposed that this paper focuses on the legal mechanisms that have been put in place in Australia so as to protect the users of Social Networking Sites. Australia has a host of privacy laws which occur within three tiers, i.e. the Commonwealth privacy legislation, state privacy legislation and at the territorial privacy legislation.16 Besides the privacy legislations, the privacy of Australian Social Networking Site users is also taken care of through privacy and confidentiality provisions within other sets of legislations, the codes of conduct as well as Common Law principles.17 The main Australian privacy legislations include the Commonwealth Privacy Act (Cth) regulated by the Federal Privacy Commissioner, the Privacy Act, 1988 (Cth) which is also regulated by the Federal Privacy Commissioner. The state of New South Wales has the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act, 1988 which is regulated by the New South Wales Privacy Commissioner. The other states which have privacy legislations include New Territory with Information Act of 2002, Queensland with the Information Privacy Act of 2009, Tasmania with the Personal Information and Protection Act of 2004 and Victoria with Information Privacy Act of 2000. Besides these legislations, Australian privacy laws are also guided by the Asia Pacific Economic Community (APEC) Privacy Framework. This international instrument has nine privacy principles which require the member states to have cross-border cooperation. However, the instrument’s stated aim is to balance between the individual’s personal privacy protection vis-à-vis the general public need for the flow of information. While this regional initiative was such a step into the right direction, the challenge that came with it is that the government has been dragging its feet towards the instrument’s implementation, five years since its unveiling. Besides, it is also heavily tilted towards the interests of business people, not the ordinary consumers.18 One of the biggest security and privacy rights issues that pose challenges within the Australian Social Networking Sites is the problem of cyber bullying.19 For instance, in the year 2008, a Youth Poll established that the problem of cyber bullying affects up to twenty two percent of young Australians, in a country where the same poll determined that up to sixty four per cent of its population aged between 15-20 years belonging to social networking sites.20 Owing to this reality, an express stated aim for legislations within the country should directly focus on how to address this problem. This being the case therefore, the Commonwealth Criminal Code criminalizes the offence. This, it does by making it an offence the using of any carriage like the Internet or cell phone in any way that is menacing, harassing or offensive. This particular provision, while it has largely been used to punish phone bullies, is widely drafted and can effectively be used to protect cyber users who find themselves greatly vulnerable to Internet related offences.21 While the Commonwealth criminal Code very explicitly criminalizes acts which may reasonably be construed as constituting cyber bullying which is rampant among the Social Network Site users, other non privacy related legislations may also come handy towards punishment of online acts which border on infringement of privacy or security of the individual. For instance, authorities point out that online threats may also be construed as constituting assaults while persistent harassments of online users may constitute the offence of stalking which may then be punished under the relevant statutes.22 Besides the outlined legislative channels, online offences that may be defamatory are also prosecutable under the relevant state’s anti-defamatory law. This has been witnessed in the case of Gutnick v Dow Jones23 where the plaintiff Victorian businessman sued the defendant US Company in the state’s Supreme Court. The plaintiff alleged that the company had published materials that defamed him on the Internet. A contentious issue during the trial was where the suit could be lodged. This is because the question turned out to be whether defamation occurred where the alleged defamatory material was uploaded or where it was downloaded. The High Court of Australia held that an online defamatory material only becomes defamatory at the point in which the damage to reputation occurs. Ordinarily, the damage to a person’s reputation occurs at the point where the material in question becomes available in a form that is comprehensible if the person has reputation in the area in question. In the court’s view, materials published on the Internet are not available in comprehensible form until at the point when they become downloaded at the computer of the end user. Suffice it to say therefore that the defamation was held to have occurred at the point where the alleged material was downloaded. To protect the privacy of online users against the likelihood of online defamation, the court awarded the plaintiff up to AuS$180,000 in damages with a further AuS$400,000 in costs. Aside from the outlined laws, Australian online users also find privacy and security protection through the Electronic Funds Transfer, EFT Code of Conduct.24 The EFT Code is administered through the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC. This comes in handy on matters relating to payments using electronic payment systems. The EFT Code of Conduct apportions liability for unauthorized transactions. The Code has worked well to protect the privacy of online users in conjunction with the Australian Guidelines for e-Commerce which were released by the Department for Treasury in March 2006 in order to enhance online consumers of e-commerce services.25 The protection of the online e-buyer was witnessed in the case of the Evagora v eBay [2001] in which the court, while relying on the provisions of the Fair Trading Act, 1999 for the state of Victoria was able to offer protection for an online buyer who had bought goods via the e-Bay’s website. The buyer had purchased the goods under the mistaken belief that the goods were entirely insured based on a misleading statement he saw on the eBay’s Website. When the plaintiff sued for the non delivery of the goods he had purchased, the court held in his favour based on the provisions of the Fair Trading Act, 1999. Consequently, eBay were found liable to the plaintiff and were directed to pay the plaintiffs for the loss of the goods that were never delivered. Given the real and serious challenges that continue to bedevil Social Networking Sites, as well as other online services, the best way to for the Australian government to develop safer protections for such site’s users, must be one that has the input of both the government and the citizens. Consequently therefore, the government needs to put in place both technical best practices as well as encourage citizens to adopt certain behavioral best practices.26 A number of technical best practices have been so identified within the United States. While not all of the said recommendations may apply to Australia owing to its unique circumstances, a number of them may form useful guides in terms of what policies the government may put in place. The various technical best practices that have been outlined within the United States include the government ensuring that the operating systems as well as the web browsers are made to become up-to-date with the international standards.27 Aside from the need for standardization of browsers, the user needs to keep a blacklist for all blocked sites for their networks. This is necessary in order to ensure that the user does not access such sites with the possible likelihood of having their machine being damaged in the process through the acquisition of worms. Closely tied to this technical requirement is one that also requires the user to ensure they maintain latest definitions of virus scanners and patches.28 Other than the above technical best recommended practices, others have been identified as including a recommendation that the user avoids accessing Internet via privileged accounts like the root or administrator, enabling in one’s computer the Data Execution Prevention within the Operating Systems so as to act as a buffer against any possible overflow of attacks, applying firewall or even Host Intrusion Prevention and finally applying Software Restriction policies for those machines which run Microsoft Windows platforms such as XP or Server 2003 in order to forestall any unauthorized and or malicious downloads.29 To counterbalance the technical best practices, users of Social Networking and other online services need to also adopt other behavioral best practices so as to protect themselves against the dangers and challenges of privacy and security. For instance, the Social Networking Site users are required to conduct risk assessment every time before they post any information about themselves or their organizations on the Internet. This is a precautionary step that will ensure everyone really takes time to reflect upon the kinds of information that they would like to post onto the Internet.30 A further way in which the government of Australia may be able to offer protection for Social Networking Site users is by encouraging the users of such services to desist from providing onto such sites all sensitive information such as addresses, phone numbers. This ensures that this kind of information does not get easily to people like stalkers and thieves who may use it for illegal activities. Another best practice way that the Australian government could employ is to ensure they first of all confirm with any third party who asks to be friends with them. The confirmation needs to be either face-to-face or verbally so as to be able to eliminate any possible likelihood that the person asking to be friends with them have impersonated another account holder.31 Closely tied to the foregoing, the Australian government needs to exhort its citizens to ensure that the users vet all third-party applications which they intend to add to their profiles. This is largely because there is absolutely no guarantee that such third party applications have themselves been reviewed or even officially approved from the parent Social Networking Site. As a wrap up to this discussion, it is to be noted that protection against the infringement of one’s privacy within the Social Networking Sites is a matter of utmost importance. However, equally of even greater importance is the fact that the security of the user to such sites is not one that can be determined unilaterally by the government. This is to be a mutual responsibility between both the government and the citizen users of the services as there is a limitation in terms of what the government can do. The ultimate safety of the online users is one that is to be founded upon a collaborative effort between the two stakeholder groups. List of References Anderson, Craig, A., Berkowitz Leonard, Donnerstein Edward, Huessman Rowell L., Johnson James D., Linz Daniel, Malamuth Neil M. & Wartella Ellen.“The Influence of Media Violence on the Youth.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest. vol. 4 No. 3 (December 2003) Australian Communications and Media Authority, cybersafety for teachers, parents, children and library staff. Available at www.acma.gov.au/webwr/_assets/main/lib310668/cybersafety_resources.pdf Bullon, Stephen (ed). Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. New Edition. London: Pearson Education Limited (2003) 1482 Bullon, Stephen (ed). Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. New Edition. London: Pearson Education Limited (2003) 1820 Bushman, Brad, J. & Cantor, Joanne. ‘Media Ratings for Violence and Sex: Implications for Policymakers and Parents’, (February 2003) American Psychologist 130-141 Connolly, Chris, ‘Hot Topics: Legal Issues in Plain Language’, (2009) 70 Cyberlaw 3 Connolly, Chris, ‘Hot Topics: Legal Issues in Plain Language’, (2009) 70 Cyberlaw 10 Connolly, Chris, ‘Hot Topics: Legal Issues in Plain Language’, (2009) 70 Cyberlaw 10 Garner, Bryan A. Black’s Law Dictionary. 8th Edition. St. Paul Minnesota: Thompson West (2004) 1384 Gutnick v Dow Jones Available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2002/56.html Information Assurance Directorate, Social Networking Sites. Available at http://www.hss.doe.gov/secop/documents/Social_Networking_Sites_and_Security.pdf Interagency OPSEC Support Staff, OPSEC and Social Networking. Available at http://www.internetsafetyawards.org/pdfs/opsec.sn.pdf Lightowlers, John, Information privacy and freedom of information legislation in Western Australia, (June 2008), Presentation to Integrity Legal’s Perth Legal Counsel Conference Malamuth, Neil, M. & Check, V. P. James. “The Effects of Mass Media Exposure on Acceptance of Violence against Women: A Field Experiment.” Journal of Research in Personality 15(91981) 436-446 Melissa de Zwart, Lindsay David, Henderson Michael and Phillips, Michael, ‘Teenagers, Legal Risks and Social Networking Sites’, (2011) Monash University Victoria Law Foundation National Security Agency, United States of America, Systems and Network Analysis Center Read More