Levy vs. Mitnick

Both Crypto and The Art of Deception expand on the issue of public privacy and security. The writing style and approach of the author’s differ. In Crypto, Levy focuses mainly on the development of encryption and it’s development over time. His work seems to be targeting an audience with some background knowledge on technological systems relating to encryption. This makes is somewhat difficult for someone like myself to follow. In contrast, Mitnick, author of The Art of Deception, presents ways to protect privacy and gives examples from a business perspective that freely connect to personal privacy and security.

Levy presents the struggle between the government and cryptographers on keeping information secure and anonymous. When Levy poses the question, “But what if governments were not the only beneficiaries of cryptography?,” he presents the idea that the general population could benefit, which is most definitely true. This book does relate to people in general, but the narrative expands on very specific details relating to the history of cryptography. From my perspective, I prefer a book that gives current examples and implications with a focus on how it affects me directly. At times Levy does point out specific implications such as those who could wrongly benefit from the transfer of anonymous information, “Kidnappers, child pornographers, and terrorists, whose lives would be made much simpler and more secure with such tools.” One could say this book goes “behind the scenes”, detailing the conflicts.

The organization and writing style of Mitnick’s work, The Art of Deception, is easier to follow. Mitnick focuses on the charisma and intelligence of social engineers to manipulate people. Though the focus is on the business world, Mitnick’s ideas and suggestions can benefit anyone living in our current world filled with electronic transactions, both online and in person. He presents his ideas by stating, “Security is not a technology problem—it’s a people and management problem.” Mintick’s style is more engaging because of the analysis of this management and the incorporation of possible solutions. He includes, from a business perspective, that it is a high priority to have a security policy and proper education and training for employees (p. 27). Like the business environment, people in general must be educated about security and privacy and understand the implications. We must also make it a priority on ourselves to think through our actions when it comes to the exchange of information. The Art of Deception presents a perspective in a meaningful manner with explicit examples and solutions.    

References

Levy, S. (2001). Crypto: How the code rebels beat the government -saving privacy in the digital age. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Mitnick, K. (2002). The art of deception. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Publishing.

CSE 619 Final Paper (first 400 words)

The personalization of information does not simply limit access to information, it  also has negative implications on other areas affecting Internet users. These areas include creativity, exploration opportunities and cultural awareness. Creativity based on one’s learning through making choices and developing connections. Limiting exploration by creating boundaries and wall impeding acess to unfamiliar information. Finally, cultural awareness that is limited to a narrow perspective based on information support one’s current beliefs or ideas.  

Static information limits the opportunities for creativity to emerge due to the similarity in the information already known to the user. In The Filter Bubble, Pariser affirms three ways personalization can interfere with creativity. First, he explains the “solution horizon” is limited. This is where users search for possible solutions to problems. With less information this limits possible options. Personalization also limits the environments accessible. For each individual, different environments can prompt creativity. Last, a filter encourages a passive approach to obtaining information due to the information being mouth-fed to the user.

Christensen, an author and educator, addresses the importance of literacy and it’s key role in promoting social justice. One can draw a parallel between this reading and understanding of text to having acess to reading material. According to Christensen, reading and writing are political acts. One example Christensen references is how slaveholders denied Africans literacy because it would lead to liberty and spread of freedom. In our current world of emerging technologies, theses have become the medium for political acts and awareness. Blogs allowing an open opinion medium. Users interacting with authors of reports of current events and issues through commenting and replying to others. Denying a person literacy is like denying a person the right to be politically involved and demand social justice. This relates to cultural awareness, one area effected by personalization.   

Tracking is another topic addressed in Christensen's work. This is an educational practice in which students are grouped and separated based on acadmic success. This is similar to what occurs when people are grouped based on personalization algorithms. In both examples, participants are excluded from certain activites or information, whether it be those from a different track or different information filter.  Christensen writes about these tracks, “Everybody should have all opportunities open to them. Why figure out ahead of time for people what they’re going to do with their lives (pp. 170).” Like tracks, personalization takes away opportunities and attempts to decide what is important. As Christensen advocates for creating quality education for all students, removing an information filter would create diverse news feeds for all internet users. 

Andrews and Pariser unite for control of privacy

Both Andrews and Pariser call for a change in the control of online privacy and security. “As a user, you should have the ability to control what happens with your information,” argues Andrews, after referencing various examples manifesting the implications of privacy on the web. Some deal with employment, family life and personal freedom. Pariser would agree that there is still the possibility of a shift. He explains the importance of “individual action, corporate responsibility and governmental regulation.” Andrew’s Social Network Constitution and Pariser’s shift acknowledge the user’s right to privacy.

As mentioned in prior posts, Pariser focuses on democracy, relating to the representation of different perspectives. The filter bubble’s effects are both personal and cultural, according to Pariser. He includes a cultural piece. Where there is a filter of information, there is a filter of opinions and ideas. Without a free flow of information, each person is not equally exposed to new and opposing ideas. Pariser includes the idea that personalization affects our thinking by giving only few choices versus the vast diversity available. The Filter Bubble also discusses the friendly world syndrome, opposite of the mean world syndrome. Because information is sifted and many things are excluded, Pariser writes “biggest most important problems fail to reach our view at all.” This causes a biased view on the reality of true issues that may not be so friendly or perfect. This is contrary to Andrew’s perspective, which focuses on the effects on advertising, data aggregators and freedom of speech.

The following are some key aspects I would include in a course for 5^th graders on smart internet use and data privacy. On main priority would be to discuss appropriate sharing. It would be encouraged to determine thoughtfully what to share and consider possible outcomes. This is necessary for all people in general. As Andrews explains, “They may not realize the extent to which their offline self in being overshadowed by their digital doppelgänger.” Discussing weblining would be a beginning, then introduce the idea that “words are powerful” as Andrews states. If students are aware of the magnitude of the ability to share and how information is available to large audiences and easily duplicated, they may reconsider how they address each other and present their virtual persona. In consideration of personalization, it would be necessary to address how it effects users in relation to information access. Pariser explains that we do not choose to be in the filter bubble and “Ultimately, the filter bubble can affect your ability to choose how you want to live.” It would be imperative to develop awareness, so that students do not settle for limited opportunities, static perspectives and little creativity. If students are aware of a filter, they may attempt other means and allow less control to this filter bubble.   

References

Andrews, L. (2011). I know who you are and I saw what you did: Social networks and the death of privacy. New York, NY: Free Press.

Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. New York, NY: The Penguin Press.