Tag: #privacy

“Off The Grid” – Deep Dive Group #3

Off  / The / Grid.

Reflections 

– by Adam, Lateefa, Sohail and Yero. 

 Our group discussed privacy and the concept of being “off the grid” on the Internet. We thought that this was a relevant topic given the direction our class was taking and because it dealt with a contemporary debate around the Internet. One of the strengths of the Internet used to be anonymity and the ability to maintain a social presence while concealing one’s identity. Edward Snowden revealed in 2013 that the NSA (National Security Agency) could invasively monitor citizens. With that fact and the reality of many countries censoring Internet access in mind, discourse on privacy becomes increasingly paramount. Through our deep-dive session, our group discussed the various ways different “stakeholders” track Internet users, how to conceal oneself from these tracking tools, and how widely accessible and easy it was to find information on Internet users.

Yero started out the presentation by generating thoughts from the audience as to what they believed being “off the grid” meant. Responses were varied and showed how contextual the concept could be. From being off electronic devices over a holiday to tweaking one’s Facebook name to be invisible to employers on social media all the way to using softwares like TOR and having untraceable online activity, responses were influenced by each individual’s personal knowledge of online anonymity resources. He then dove into the specifics of what incentives were behind seeking “off-the-grid” behaviour online. This search appeared to be at a crossroads between privacy, untraceability and anonymity. Delving even deeper, it was clear that power, assets, relevance and confidentiality over sensitive information were what motivated different stakeholders, notably, governments, activist organisations or hackers to bother going the complicated route of being ‘under-the-radar’. Whether good or bad reasons motivate such a behaviour, could serve as substance for another debate, another time.

The second part of Yero’s talk introduced the concept of digital footprints, the trail of data we create while using the Internet. It includes the websites we visit, emails we send, and information we submit to online services. Most of the time, these small packets of information we leave behind ourselves are “passive”; that is, they are unintentional. It then became interesting to look at the different tools that websites, applications and ISPs use to track our activity online. We successively looked at IP addresses, HTTP referrers, Cookies and Super Cookies, Tracking scripts and Browser fingerprinting and their respective roles in both easing web navigation and privacy breaches. We included examples of how such tools could be used in a simple browsing session to collect info about users and subsequently be sold to advertising networks that then build up detailed customer profiles for pinpoint ad-targeting. Lastly, we invited the class to go to panopticlick.eff.org, a research project by the Electronic Frontier Foundation that allows participants to see how many bits of information one’s browser leaves behind when they’re surfing online.

Adam started with a small social experiment: each person had to search the name of the person sitting next to them and then post whatever they found on a shared Google document. This activity turned out to be particularly interesting. There was something about every person on the Internet – mainly information related to NYU and professional work posted by the students online. With a few exceptions, personal information was easy to find. What I found most interesting was the reaction that people had when they were sharing these in the group and the manner in which they reacted to the shared information. There was an expectation of pranking the person about their content, but there was also general awkwardness that undercut the entertainment factor. One interpretation can be that most users in the classroom realized the sensitive nature of the information that was shared inside the classroom, which is a much more formal setting than e.g. a friend group. Adam then proceeded to talk about what we call the Deep Web, how to access it (The Onion Router) and the Dark Web.

We also tried to contextualize much of the topics discussed on privacy to experiences in the UAE. We tackled how privacy and VoIP functioned within the UAE by looking at different applications such as Skype, Discord and WhatsApp. We also discussed the authoritarian behaviour that characterized how Etisalat and the TRA handle VoIP. We briefly discussed the rules and regulations on VoIP within the UAE and the details of their regulations throughout the years. (Initial Skype ban in 2006 and the March 2017 VoIP ban). There are a few reasons to why we wanted to extend the discussion on privacy to discussing VoIP in the UAE. One prominent reason is the privilege that comes with being an NYUAD student. That privilege includes experiences with open access to the Internet (although with limits to certain websites like Al Jazeera), which many individuals on campus do not realize is vastly different from experiences off-campus.

Part of the learning aspect of our presentation was to raise consciousness on the limits of privacy and VoIP within the UAE outside of the Saadiyat bubble. We discussed how the ban works (through port blocking that causes audio quality to be significantly reduced and not discernible by the other party). We also discussed the rationalisation given by the TRA on the banning of VoIP in the UAE, which is the claim that the encryption of VoIP makes it subject to being blocked and that non-encrypted versions (offered by the TRA), are not blocked. This ban of encryption strikes at the core of our discussion of privacy.

We also discussed methods people have to get around the laws and regulations over VoIP, including using VPN’s and trying to find new services that have still not been blocked. The current VoIP solutions offered are C’me and Botim, which are both paid monthly subscription alternatives that raise issues such as creating a monopoly over Internet services that are meant to be free, as well as exploiting expats/migrants who use the Internet to communicate with their families abroad. We also discussed the lack of transparency from the TRA and Etisalat on the subject of VoIP, of which many individuals on campus are unaware. After speaking with Craig after our class, we considered the viewpoint that just because a service is not yet blocked, doesn’t mean it hasn’t been uncovered. It may simply be used to track user attitudes and lead to a larger crackdown later on.

We were able to remain mostly on schedule. We had set aside portions for discussions, such as the group activity and a final discussion on the topics with class. Some parts of our presentation, including the group activity, dragged on slightly which caused us to be behind schedule towards the end of our presentation, and primarily leading Lateefa to rush her section.

REFERENCES