As revealed last week, US intelligence has – via internet giants – access to personal correspondence and other private data posted by people. By its nature, the erupting scandal pits ensuring citizens’ freedoms against guaranteeing security.
Editorial: how to stand for internet freedom
Please note that the article is more than five years old and belongs to our archive. We do not update the content of the archives, so it may be necessary to consult newer sources.
As told to Estonian Public Broadcasting, yesterday, by President Ilves, we again face the questions of finding the balance between national security and citizens’ privacy. He said: «It seems to me that, for web users, the pendulum has swung to one side right now – to the detriment of privacy. And to the detriment of citizens of the European Union.»
(So far), we do not know all that much about the PRISM program and in all probability Estonians need not panic about pictures they have posted to Facebook. On the other hand, this is definitely not the time to say soothing things à la«no one will touch the pure in heart». Sure: to spy after somebody, there needs to be a motive, and it is quite unlikely that US intelligence would be willing to work their way through anything personal posted by an average Estonian villager, or their private chats. The issue not being that of definite cases – rather, it is a matter of principle.
For years, the tiny Estonia has topped the Freedomhouse internet freedom chart, with USA ranking second. The impact of the PRISM scandal on this year’s assessments remains to be seen. An essential question arises: what could be done to keep and advance internet freedom?
As revealed by the list of companies allegedly participating in PRISM, US firms almost totally rule the internet services market, pointing the Europe lagging behind. «Without a cloud (storages of data accessible via internet – edit) subject to EU law only, we cannot be assured our data is safe,» said President Ilves.
It seems kind of funny that possible dangers are noticed only now that we have learnt that companies share data with US intelligence; yet, with great zeal and enthusiasm, we have voluntarily handed all kinds of data to these companies, even though their answers about its use have always been evasive. It might even be claimed that, for an ordinary person, a greater worry than the US intelligence having their data would be what the companies themselves are doing with all that information.
In conclusion: it is worth considering what you want to make known about yourself and what not. And to be aware that, over the internet, people tend to be more open than in real life. For private business, it is good to use cryptographic devices.