The Witty Stride

– Satyakam Ray

Renowned Science fiction writer Isaac Asimov wrote,

“The government doesn’t want any system of transmitting information to remain unbroken unless it’s under its control.”

The fictional tale of the past becomes a factual reality in the now. This occurs when we consider recent mass surveillance programs conducted by various governments.

• In August 2014, a report emerged about Australian law enforcement agencies. They had been accessing citizens’ web browsing histories without a warrant. This was done via Internet service providers such as Telstra.
• The Chinese Ministry of Public Security operates the Golden Shield Project, a mass-censorship and surveillance system. This tool enables the Chinese government to monitor its citizens and censor online content as necessary.
• Project 6 – A global surveillance project. It is jointly operated by the German Intelligence agencies BND and BfV. They work in close cooperation with the U.S. agency, the CIA.
• The Central Monitoring System (CMS) enables the Indian government to intercept phone conversations. It can monitor emails and text messages. It also monitors social media posts and analyzes Google search queries.
• Mastering the Internet (MTI): In this program, the British intelligence agency GCHQ collects the contents of email messages. It also collects Facebook entries and the web browsing histories of Internet users.
• PRISM is a clandestine national security electronic surveillance program. The US National Security Agency (NSA) operates this program. It can target individuals within and outside the US.
• Pegasus Project—An Israel-based NSO group provides spyware to governments to control surveillance operations, curb terrorism, and ensure national security. Yet recent revelations suggest that various governments have misused spyware to restrict press freedom and silence critics.

These programs are only the tip of the iceberg. After the 9/11 attacks on the US, several intelligence agencies decided to spy on individuals electronically. Law enforcement agencies also participated in this effort. They believed spying electronically was appropriate. They also considered it necessary to do so digitally. This action was intended to prevent further terrorist activities. Nonetheless, doing so has raised tough questions about personal privacy. It has also sparked discussions on freedom of expression. These issues can lead to human rights violations.

What if this unprecedented privacy breach is projected the other way around? There is subtle jingoism. Pervasive digital snooping on citizens is portrayed as legal. This is done by silencing valid concerns raised by a few sane voices. Under the guise of national duty, gullible citizens may be lured or coerced into actions beyond their comprehension. These actions severely affect their privacy. This concept can be termed surveillance nationalism.

Digital snooping + Jingoism = Surveillance Nationalism

How is it different from Surveillance capitalism?

Shoshana Zuboff’s book, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, sheds light on this sensitive yet obscure digital bubble. According to Zuboff, surveillance capitalism centers on the modification of personal data to enable targeted advertising. Almost every social media platform, including Google, uses this capitalistic Internet model. The Facebook security policy update sparked a significant international outcry and is part of a broader trend in digital surveillance.

Zuboff identifies four critical aspects of surveillance capitalism.

• Emphasis on data extraction and analysis
• Development of new contractual forms using computer monitoring and automation
• Customization of services offered to users of digital platforms
• Carrying out experiments on consumers to predict their buying behavior

The purview of surveillance capitalism is limited to the advertisements and public relations of products or services. Nonetheless, surveillance nationalism causes more severe privacy breaches. Surveillance capitalism often predicts consumer behavior and, over time, influences individuals’ purchasing habits. At the same time, surveillance nationalism reduces a person to a mere object of digital surveillance. It also supports a widespread propaganda drive. Both concepts can alienate the average, unsuspecting citizen who agrees to every term and condition without initially reading them. Little do they know that a single app can access contacts, photographs, and mobile information. It can stream videos and activate the camera at will, even when the user is dormant.

Government/Private snooping and its instances:

Various governments monitor their citizens for primary reasons.

• To fight terrorism
• To prevent crime in the first place
• To guarantee national security
• To prevent social dissent
• To control the population

Governments cannot refrain from collecting biometric data and other essential information. Assurances are needed to preserve citizens’ freedom of speech and individual privacy. Instead, full-scale digital spying has been conducted secretly through the back doors of government facilities for many years. Thanks to whistleblowers, we sometimes realize our illusions. Living a free life under a thriving democracy is occasionally shattered. It reveals the truth.

Edward Snowden Incident: Edward Snowden was an American whistleblower. He sparked international outrage after leaking highly classified information from the US National Security Agency (NSA). Snowden was a CIA employee and subcontractor. His revelations highlighted many global surveillance programs operated by the NSA and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance. This alliance included European governments and telecommunications companies. He revealed an NSA program called Optic Nerves. It captured webcam images from Yahoo users’ video chats at five-minute intervals and stored them for subsequent use.

After reports by The Guardian and The Washington Post on digital espionage, the Department of State revoked Snowden’s passport. Later asylum extensions allowed him to stay at Moscow airport. He was finally granted permanent residency in Russia in October 2020.

Cambridge Analytica Scandal: British consulting firm Cambridge Analytica harvested data from up to 87 million Facebook profiles. Data scientist Aleksandr Kogan led this effort. They used this information to supply analytical assistance to the 2016 presidential campaigns of Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. A former Cambridge Analytica employee, Christopher Wylie, exposed this clandestine activity to The Guardian and The New York Times. The Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook $5 billion for its privacy violations. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before Congress and was questioned extensively about the company’s privacy practices. Since then, the roles of social media platforms and giant tech companies have changed. Companies have been under public scrutiny.

Does the Indian government spy on Indians?

The answer to this troubling yet confusing question is: WE DON’T KNOW. Various controversies about privacy have emerged and been thoroughly discussed in public forums. Some have even been challenged in the courts. Nonetheless, in the wake of the Pegasus privacy row, it’s now alleged that the government is actively engaged in mass-scale surveillance.

• Aadhaar Card Privacy Issue: Hyper-nationalistic voices hail Aadhaar as the champion of Indian Unity. It identifies all Indians with unique IDs. It has a massive database built to safeguard biometric data and other sensitive information. The government requires all Indians to link their individual accounts. These accounts include bank accounts and Permanent Account Numbers (PAN). They must be linked to their Aadhaar. The government has issued deadlines for compliance. Many argue that it’s a breach of the Right to Privacy Act and can be used as a mass-surveillance tool. The suspicion is well-founded, given recent privacy breaches. Without a clear purpose for data collection, the data is not used appropriately. It can be exploited for other purposes illegally without the consent of the citizens. It’s alleged that Aadhaar card information was sold on the black market online for 500 rupees. The truth has yet to be ascertained.
• Aarogya Setu App controversy: During the coronavirus pandemic, the government mandated the Aarogya Setu app for all public-sector employees. This decision affected all public sector workers. It was also mandatory for private sector employees and those in containment zones. French ethical hacker Elliot Alderson, also known as Mr. Robot’s White Hat, raised an issue with the app, stating that the privacy of 90 million Indians was at risk. Though the government has clarified its stance, a few skeptics remain unconvinced.
• NaMo App—After being promoted by PM Modi, the NaMo app collected information about Indians. It promised it wouldn’t give information to third parties without user consent. Yet, the data breach happened when the app quietly shared sensitive user information with an American firm without permission. It was exposed, further fueling the privacy debate.
• Facebook Hate Speech row: In a report, The Wall Street Journal claimed Facebook did not enforce its hate speech rules. Some BJP politicians were not subjected to these rules. Yet, they did enforce them against other parties. This information sparked controversy in India, prompting strong responses from opposition parties. Facebook India Policy head Ankhi Das eventually resigned from her post after allegedly being involved in content interference.

The Indian government utilizes Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, to digitally monitor the population. This act authorizes the government to issue directives. It can intercept, monitor, or decrypt any information through any computer resource. It can be used to check internal security and suppress dissent.

The government-ordered blocking of several prominent Twitter accounts supporting the farmer protests illustrates how surveillance capitalism cooperates with surveillance nationalism. Though the accounts were later unblocked, it was feared that the blocking was intended to promote a malicious hashtag campaign.

Do Indians care about data privacy at all?

In 2017, the Indian Supreme Court made a significant ruling. The court held that Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees every citizen’s fundamental right to privacy. Enforcing the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 (PDP Bill) can help protect individuals’ data in India.

Infused with a false sense of Nationalism, many argue that data privacy is a matter of personal choice. They often demonstrate a complete disregard for data privacy concerns. We share everything on social media platforms without much consideration. Their point of view is correct, though it pertains to our carelessness in handling sensitive private data.

Perils and Remedies of Surveillance Nationalism:

Perils:

• Identity theft is a possibility in surveillance, where one loses their proof of existence in a digital utopia. It reduces citizens’ privacy to a new low.
• With the available tools, political interference and influence can be quickly exerted, undermining the essence of democracy.
• Serious human rights violations are a by-product of surveillance Nationalism. Every dissenting voice can be quickly suppressed through digital surveillance.
• A totalitarian autocracy can be built under the garb of a thriving democracy with pangs of surveillance nationalism.

Remedies:

• Educating the general public about data privacy is a preventive measure against data breaches. This includes understanding what to share and what not to share. Still, Nationalism may influence the strong.
• Knowing personal rights and responsibilities towards the nation is the primary job of every citizen. Digital literacy, suffused with rationality, is of paramount importance.
• We need to keep a liberal and curious mindset. This will help counter extremist ideology. It is the way ahead if we want to curb surveillance nationalism.

William Shakespeare wrote Hamlet’s masterpiece between 1599 and 1601. The play addresses the need for privacy. Almost four centuries later, the play remains largely unknown to a large segment of the population. Nonetheless, the underlying agenda is quite relevant. This is especially true given the uncharted path we have chosen in a digitally controlled society. Surveillance nationalism is imminent, poised to fully shape our future.