The Privacy Threats of 2014

After Edward Snowden released some of the most significant national security leaks ever, we've been fed a constant stream of sickening revelations. Snowden's message has mostly been listened to, and the year culminated with him even getting a spot on prime time TV to tell us that “a child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all.”

But it's not just the NSA's unregulated carpet bombing of civil liberties that you need to worry about. While we'll apparently hear more from Snowden in the new year, a new barrage of threats to privacy are also likely to take place. These are the privacy threats of the near future.

Law enforcement surveillance

Initially funded in 2012, FirstNet emerged as a “key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission.” It's a project that seeks to create a single broadband network over the entirety of the United States for use by first responders, be they paramedics, fire-fighters or law enforcement.

At the moment, there are fewer than a dozen tests of FirstNet taking place in states including California, North Carolina, New Mexico, Colorado, Mississippi and New Jersey, and the project does have some positive applications. One example is that after 'tagging' a disaster victim with a small device, their vital signs can be monitored remotely from a control centre, allowing medical staff to more efficiently prioritise those who most need treatment.

But law enforcement is at the forefront when it comes to further development of the system; the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and the Army all already use it. With new applications, a police officer could, according to the demonstration video above, take a picture of someone with a tablet and instantly find out whether they're in the system and if so, who they are. Thanks to the high-speed nature of the network, iris, fingerprint and facial recognition can be used by local cops anywhere in the country, and multiple databases and on-the-spot scanning work together to give instantaneous identification. FirstNet provides the infrastructure to link all these resources together.

But there are worries that the system is not primarily in the interest of the state. Earlier this year, the project was described as being “developed largely by consultants”, which led to board members with more of a “commercial […] point of view” having more involvement with the project than those primarily concerned with public safety. There is also a lack of financial transparency, and with the potential to tap into a market worth over $100 billion by 2020, it has led some members to further doubt the motivation for the project.

Of course, there are serious privacy worries as well. Having all of this data and highly sophisticated spy gear aggregated into one easy-to-use interface has problems. Firstly, there is a massive potential for abuse. It is allegedly being supported due to its “labor saving applications," but it's not hard to imagine cops using this for their own benefit. Remember the NSA employees who spied on their own love interests? Now do that with biometric, GPS and license plate data. Second is the much more sinister issue of eliminating anonymity. With this mass surveillance system, people can know exactly who you are, whether you like it or not. What happens when this system is used autonomously by computers and married with CCTV?

Assuming the tests of FirstNet are successful, and satisfy those with a financial stake in the system, local law enforcement having access to never-before-seen power will be a major obstacle to preserving our privacy.

Bionic augmentations

The DIY bio-hacking scene really blossomed in 2013, and the gap between man and machine, skin and silicon became that little bit less distinguished.

Grind House Wetware, the guys behind this particular hack that measures data from the user's body and transfers it to an Android device, say that they can “even connect your body to the internet—right now.”

Having your body "connected to the internet" will—with no exaggeration‚—revolutionise the way we live. From monitoring chemical balances to providing a completely new way to seamlessly transmit information with people on the other side of the planet through pseudo-telekinetic communication, marrying microchips with our biology is the next step for humanity.

But what happens when commercial companies get in on the action? What happens when the liberating open-source nature of biohacking becomes a commodity sold by the big tech companies? This seems inevitable. According to the Wu cycle, detailed in Tim Wu's The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires, systems that start as open and free become closed eventually.

As the Guardian reported from Wu's book, this is"a typical progression of information technologies: from somebody's hobby to somebody's industry; from jury-rigged contraption to slick production marvel; from a freely accessible channel to one strictly controlled by a single corporation or cartel—from open to closed system."

We are already well aware of the kind of back doors and zero-day exploits of commercial products that the NSA makes use of. From iPhones to Microsoft Windows, if something isn't open source and thus open to scrutiny from the wider expert community, no one can be sure of quite how secure it is.

Worryingly, back doors have already been discovered in ageing medical tech. Security researcher Barnaby Jack, for instance, this year developed a method for wirelessly hacking into pacemakers, sending the device into a high voltage overload and its host into a fatal spasm.

With this in mind, and the possibility of having access to data describing or even controlling your bodily functions compromised, the rise of bionic augmentations may be accompanied by the ultimate invasion of privacy, as soon as commercial companies decide to monetize the movement.

Increased demand for a private surveillance sector

As knowledge of the power of surveillance systems and tactics spreads, the demand for them is likely to increase. Luckily for those craving such services, the private surveillance industry is already big business.

The Surveillance Industry Index gives a window into this world. Compiled by pressure group Privacy International, it's a set of 1,203 documents detailing the services of 338 companies in 36 countries. These guys sell data analysis and storage, gear that can extract passwords, and other targeting software.

In the last days of 2013, Jacob Applebaum at the Chaos Computer Club conference described some truly phenomenal pieces of surveillance technology being used by the NSA's elite hacking force: a device used in black bag attacks that can attack a computer when placed within 8 miles of its target, USB cables with hidden chips that allow network access, and—something that is beyond even the most morbid dystopian nightmare—a piece of kit that beams radiation at people and the computers around them, providing “the means to collect signals that otherwise would not be collectable, or would be extremely difficult to collect and process.”

(In fact, when Jacob revealed this particular gadget to Julian Assange, he reportedly quipped, “Hmm… I bet the people around Hugo Chavez are going to wonder what caused his cancer.”

Although this specific tech is only available to NSA employees at the moment—at least according to the documents released by Jacob and Der Spiegel, which described them as featuring on an “internal catalog”—the agency's reliance on private contractors may suggest their proliferation outside of the US is nigh. It would be naïve to think that these private surveillance companies would think twice about filling any country's hacker teams with the latest tech, as long as they can afford the price.

Imagine these devices in the hands of a Bashir al-Assad, or any other of the myriad dictators our world is still plagued with. The chance to spy on anyone who may be in an opposing political party, a troublesome journalist, or just your population at large, is far too tempting to those in power.

This is already happening with the sale of web applications to Syria and Sudan, which is happening despite sanctions against these countries. India is setting up the National Intelligence Grid to fight “against terrorism," and plenty of African nations are already actively spying on individuals via technological means.

The continued proliferation of highly sophisticated surveillance equipment—analogous to the spread of nuclear weapons—is sure to represent an extension of the human rights violations already revealed by the Snowden leaks in 2013; but in countries that have even less protection against them than in the US or UK.

The continuing fight for privacy and the rise of Europe

All of this being said, the issue of privacy has never been more on the public agenda. Groups such as Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Civil Liberties Union are enjoying bigger platforms than ever before, helping them spread the message that privacy is something worth preserving.

The EU Data Protection Directive seeks to fully harmonize data regulation in Europe, in an attempt to bring standards of privacy up. This will be the first indicator that the Snowden leaks are having an effect on actual government policy when it comes to mass surveillance. If it doesn't fall apart—and it did take a step backwards in December due to disagreements between the debating countries and the looming European elections—some insiders claim that adoption of the measures will come towards the end of 2014.

While political reform is taking place in Europe, the continent may become the epicentre for the business of privacy too. As Silicon Valley companies are consistently shown to be unreliable or conspirators with US surveillance programmes, users in search of secure communications are looking to European companies. Vikram Kumar, CEO of tech company MEGA, predicted this: “I think there’s a business opportunity for companies to be based in Western Europe, if they want to provide reassurance for their customers around privacy.” he told me.

So while new threats to privacy loom on the horizon, a combination of the work done by pressure groups and an increased understanding amongst the public and politicians of the importance of privacy may also spur a refocus—and a real reform—of surveillance in 2014.

@josephfcox