Seven Paths to Regulating Privacy

History is ambiguous about government willingness to protect private life, but a few recommendations can help keep its future secure

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

I am not only retired from all public employments, but I am retiring within myself, and shall be able to view the solitary walk and tread the paths of private life with heartfelt satisfaction. 

—George Washington, letter to the Marquis de Lafayette, 1784

That is one view of privacy. Here is another:


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


We must all watch one another.
—Rev. Robert Browne, guiding principles, 1582

Browne was an Anglican minister, and his dark view of the human spirit as weak and prone to wickedness without the constant “support” of a community of spies and informers had enormous influence on the New England Puritans. Both quotations are drawn from Robert Ellis Smith’s essential study of the history of privacy in America, Ben Franklin’s Web Site.

Those two deeply rooted but antagonistic approaches to privacy have simmered together for centuries, but today converging forces in politics, technology, commerce and law have brought them to a boil. We offer seven policy recommendations that would help preserve Washington’s idyllic picture of private life without having to endure Browne’s nightmare.

1. Restore the role of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court in issuing warrants for wiretapping. Targeted wiretapping approved by a warrant is essential for fighting crime and terrorism. But the amendment to FISA that Congress approved this past July could violate the rights of innocent people. There was no need to extend the period of emergency, warrantless wiretapping from three days to seven. And the re­­duced oversight by the FISA court under the new law amplifies the risk of error or abuse in authorizing wiretaps.

2. Deny the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s proposal to require all “telephone” capabilities of the Internet to be “wiretap-ready.” True, many telephone conversations are being partly routed over the Internet—not only by services such as Skype but also by the nation’s cell phone carriers. But granting the FBI’s proposal would have such crippling side effects that it would do much more harm than good. One key reason for opposing it is that such wiretap capability could open up a new backdoor entry to the Internet, which the nation’s enemies could then exploit.

3. End the secrecy surrounding the Cyber Initiative. To protect the Internet from such attacks, the Bush administration has launched a “Cyber Initiative,” a program that could end up costing billions of dollars. The initiative clearly aims to conduct widespread surveillance of Internet traffic, yet plans for it are so hush-hush that there has been little or no public debate about it. Plenty of discussion about other kinds of defense spending has taken place without tipping off the enemy; here, too, debate is needed.

4. Grant people control over their own medical information. Patients should be able to determine who sees which parts of their personal medical and genetic records—with one exception. Once proper safeguards are in place to protect individuals, the information should be made available anonymously for studies in medicine and public health.

5. Encrypt and control all records. Organizations that store personal information—including those that hold biometric data and data generated by radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags—must keep it from falling into the wrong hands. The threat of lawsuits as well as criminal sanctions through tougher privacy laws is needed to enforce this obligation.

6. Regulate the use of RFID tags. When RFID tags are embedded in a retail product, they should be disabled once the shopper has paid for the product. Even if they store nothing more than a serial number, they enable anyone who carries such a tag to be followed surreptitiously. If they must remain readable—as in licenses, passports, and the like—their presence should be disclosed to the carrier. If the tags store personal information, including information about time and place, it should be encrypted and the carrier should be warned about its presence.

7. Develop educational curricula about the risks to privacy in the online world. Schools and educators should also prepare students to take advantage of the tools available for protecting privacy.

Note: This article was orignially printed with the title, "Seven Paths to Privacy".

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe