Expanding requirements for security, transparency and privacy among ordinary users, business and government
Their shape and scale are systematically changing, the focus can shift from PC to mobile applications, from sites to messengers and back.
Information is becoming an increasingly valuable resource containing more and more important personal or corporate data. As a result, people, companies and governments are ready to invest more and more in its protection and expect that this protection will be maximum and exhaustive, able to prevent any threat.
According to experts interviewed by EY6, the TOP 3 most dangerous for the private sector cyber threats include phishing, malware and cyber attacks to disrupt operations.
The key risks associated with this are leakage of financial and customer information, strategic plans or, directly, the loss of money.
For the government, the risks associated with cyberthreats are also very high and diverse. From transport management and social security to financial infrastructure and national security. And governments will not stop at any cost to ensure their cybersecurity.
Thus, in May 2019, real military force was first used to prevent cyberattacks. The Tsakhal Air Force launched a dotty strike on a building in Gaza City from which a hacker attack was conducted. Ordinary users may at any time encounter hacking into their social network account, bank account or email. The threats seem to be obvious, and the security and privacy of personal and corporate data is by definition necessary.
But to form a clear idea of how information will circulate in the distant future and whether data protection will be needed at all, is difficult, because the issue of privacy and corporate information has recently emerged in the polar currents.
The majority of ordinary users, of course, are in favor of privacy, traffic rules and device security. This position is categorically shared by the private sector and the state.
However, technical progress has led to the appearance of a category of people who are in favor of full disclosure of AP, cancellation of correspondence secrecy and free and free circulation of information. It is possible that in the future this will be the case, and the concept of personal data and privacy will simply lose its relevance, and all information generated in the world will be publicly available.
The most vivid and tragic example of the struggle for freedom of information is the story of the American Internet activist, IT-visioneer and talented programmer Aaron Schwartz, who was an ardent supporter of infinite and free circulation of information.
On January 6, 2013, he was charged with illegally downloading academic publications from the JSTOR Paid Digital Library database (an online aggregator of full-text scientific journals), which he was about to place in the free domain. The charges, including fraud, threatened Schwartz with up to 35 years in prison. Having admitted his guilt, he could shorten his sentence to 6 months. But on January 11, 2013. The 26-year-old programmer was found hanging himself in his apartment.
Internet activists made a large number of statements, and on January 26 of the same year, the Anonymous movement even hacked into the U.S. Corrections Commission's website, claiming that it was done in retaliation for the death of Aaron Schwartz.
The so-called dataists (followers of the concept of datayism, which advocates freedom of information, which in their understanding is the highest value) promote the idea that everyone should share all information about themselves and not keep anything secret.
It would seem that this idea is absurd and impossible due to human nature. But it is worth remembering how communism in the XIX century from a little-known doctrine has grown into a full-fledged global socio-political movement, which became an alternative to capitalism and denied the right of private property, the possibility of developing datayism from an ordinary concept in a large-scale social and information paradigm seems not so unreal. Although the ideological trend of datayism has only recently emerged, and few people know about it, in practice it turns out that we are putting more and more information about ourselves, whether arbitrary or not, in public space.
The current generation is pouring almost every action into the net, sharing their thoughts, emotions, experiences and plans. They gradually reject the very idea of personal information, gradually projecting the whole most part of their life into the public field. And older generations also do not think much about protecting their APs. Downloading any application or registering on any site, we do not read the agreement on providing AP, but simply click "agree". We have even stopped understanding what information we share with outsiders and programs. AI and neural networks are increasingly being used to make decisions in lieu of people, developing a crisis of trust and generating a need for ideas such as understandable AI and AI management.
According to experts from Gartner, this trend requires a focus on six key elements of trust: ethics, honesty, open-mindedness, liability, competence, sequence. NAPs such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) are adopted worldwide, encouraging evolution and setting basic rules and restrictions for organizations carrying out R&D in advanced intellectual technologies.
People trust and enable programs more and more. This is due to the opportunities they offer us. By opening up IT to the full, we will be able to transfer to digital algorithms the enormous burden that our social and economic system used to carry, and improve the comfort and security of life. For example, in his book "Homo Deus" YV Harari describes a hypothetical situation where Google, having access to our correspondence and queries in search engines, can identify an emerging flu epidemic in London in minutes.
In what way?
The program only needs to track the words that residents write in their messages, e-mails or typed in the browser, then compare them with a database of symptoms of certain diseases.
If Londoners on an average day mention in their correspondence such key words as "headache", "runny nose", "nausea", "chills" 100 thousand times, and today there was a spike of up to 300 thousand times, then the epidemic began. The only condition is that users need access to AP, including messengers, social networks, email, SMS messages, etc.
It would take weeks for the traditional health care system.
It would take weeks to record the trend of increasing morbidity, track contact persons, identify hot spots, etc.
The program, having access to our personal data, can do it all constantly, continuously and with a high degree of efficiency. Against the background of the COVID-19 crisis, such an opportunity does not seem absurd and unacceptable.
In the long run, humanity may well choose to give up privacy in favor of security and, moreover, survival.
On the other hand, voices in favor of privacy and correspondence secrecy are also strong. As a result, it is quite difficult to predict accurately whether AP protection and privacy will be the main priorities after 2035.
And yet, in the prospect of the next 10-15 years, the need to ensure privacy and confidentiality of personal data and personal life is likely to be one of the most powerful incentives for IT development.