Nothing to hide?

This is probably off-topic for this blog. You’d probably expect this on Schneier’s blog instead.

If you have some time, go download and read this excellent paper: “I’ve Got Nothing to Hide” and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy written by Professor Daniel Solove of the George Washington University Law School.

[T]he problem with the nothing to hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. Agreeing with this assumption concedes far too much ground and leads to an unproductive discussion of information people would likely want or not want to hide. As Bruce Schneier aptly notes, the nothing to hide argument stems from a faulty “premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong.”

The deeper problem with the nothing to hide argument is that it myopically views privacy as a form of concealment or secrecy. But understanding privacy as a plurality of related problems demonstrates that concealment of bad things is just one among many problems caused by government programs such as the NSA surveillance and data mining.

Your government is working so hard to prevent terrorism that they are trampling your rights to privacy. I used to be in the ‘nothing to hide’ camp, but we are clearly slipping quickly down this slope into dangerous territory. Another quote from the paper:

The potential future uses of any piece of personal information are vast, and without limits or accountability on how that information is used, it is hard for people to assess the dangers of the data being in the government’s control.

Election day is coming, folks. Making changes in Washington is the only way to tell the government we are more afraid of losing our rights than we are of terrorism. Ben Franklin said “Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”