Vulnerability is not technology - you are vulnerable

Any condemnation of confidentiality must admit that we are lonely and powerless. Technical journalistCharlie Warzel, presenting in the spring of this year a newNew York Times on Privacy, described the term “confidentiality” as “impoverished”. He explained that the problem of confidentiality is that this concept“So comprehensive that it cannot be adequately described”, - the so-called hyperobject likeclimate change or social classes. Only in those moments when some specific aspects of confidentiality are in the spotlight, we manage to catch a glimpse of the totality of what this word can describe.

</p>

However, Warzel attemptedRethink privacy or define it in a more accessible way. Since we, ultimately, are unable to control how all the data we create is used - distributed, systematized or stolen - we gradually lose control of our own lives.

“When technology drives so many aspectsof our lives - and when these technologies are based on the exploitation of our data - confidentiality comes down not only to knowing your secrets, but to autonomy, ”writes Warzel.

A reference to control is useful as it helpsunderstand the importance of privacy. We all like to believe that we control our destiny and property. As a rule, everything that threatens this faith, whether legal or not, can provoke an emotional reaction. Usually we fight for our freedom. But with technology, our approach is different. And this is almost entirely due to good marketing. Over the past 20 years, technology companies have appropriated the idea of ​​personal autonomy, using it as an advertising move for their platforms and actually making personalization a key feature of the product. Outwardly, it really seems like we are in control.

But, as Warzel remarked, we know that behind the scenessomething else happens. We are aware, albeit vaguely, that the trace of data that we leave online is used in ways that we cannot fully imagine and for which we did not give explicit consent. However, we need to live in the modern world. The more necessary it becomes to connect to the Internet, the less choice we have, which means that we are becoming less autonomy - a key component of the ability to control our lives. It is difficult to expect a person to gain control over anything if there was no such option at all.

This does not mean that the idea of ​​control (or itsloss) is the wrong way to represent the concept of confidentiality (or its loss). Confidentiality is certainly associated with control. The connection of confidentiality with control is useful if you talk about it correctly, that is, from the opposite. If control gives us a sense of the ability to make decisions and responsibility for the results (positive qualities of technology implementation), then perhaps we should focus on the opposite: loss of control.

What happens when we lose control?We are angry or confused. We often come into despair. We panic. When we control the situation, we are safe, under protection. When we lose control, we are at risk.We are becoming vulnerable.

Vulnerability can often be heard when they sayabout technology, although it is rarely about people. The technology industry has adopted the concept of vulnerability. Vulnerabilities today are usually software problems. These are loopholes through which you can access our information without our consent and which ultimately pose privacy risks.

These so-called vulnerabilities are constantlyare detected. For example, on August 20, 2019, security experts discovered eight different vulnerabilities in Google’s Nest IQ cameras, exposing them to a number of potential hazards. On the same day, we learned that in the latest software update, Apple accidentally reopened a previously closed vulnerability that could give attackers full control over the phone.

In July, a problem was discovered at the Capital One bank.The company said that a hacker - a former employee named Page Thompson - gained access to data from more than 100 million owners of credit cards using a method known as cryptodjing. Page supposedly“At the end of March, she created a program for searching a cloud service client for a certain error in the firewall configuration”, after which“Used it to obtain information for privileged access to the databases of the victim bank and to other web applications”. The list of such cases will continue to grow.

Perhaps it is time for us to make our own linguistic appropriation. We need to regain the concept of vulnerability.

When technologies are at risk of hacking, attacksOr abuses, there is always someone who follows this. A team of engineers will quickly create a patch or update to correct the technical problem.The software is protected. We are not.When our phone is hacking remotely orThey stole our banking information, we find a complete absence of autonomy with us. In the same way, it is found that a sense of control is a positive feedback that provides the content and recommendations to us - this is a lie. We are left without tools to correct the problem. Support services are overloaded. Legal protection at best is uneven.

Images: BitNews

We act blindly. We are desperate for any solution that seems solid. We trust in any strategy that seems right, but usually is actually wrong, as in the case of sweeping attempts at legislative reform.

Before you decide how we want to realizeMechanisms of control, you need to honestly consider our situation, the reality of our position in the system. And it is here that we are borrowing a familiar term, we humanize the general problem: vulnerability. It is necessary to realize that the technology is not vulnerable -we are vulnerable. Any discussion of confidentiality should begin with this: we have no control. We are powerless and alone.

This is where the battle for privacy begins.

</p>