Reader Response Draft#4

In the article “Who’s the true enemy of internet freedom -China, Russia or the U.S?”, Morozov (2015) asserts that though Russia and China restrict internet freedom to maintain their technological sovereignty locally, it is the U.S that exploits internet freedom to assert its digital sovereignty globally. It is reported in the article that the U.S has great interest in the information that is serviced by its companies but stored elsewhere. The author concludes that countries like Russia and China are imposing stricter internet censorship and control over their citizens’ data not just to control domestic tensions, but in response to the growing technological supremacy of the U.S.

The U.S tries to establish its technological supremacy by many ways – like making efficient services like Google and Microsoft available across the globe, which are then could not be easily replaced by domestic services (Morozov, 2015). However, the fact that the U.S tries to enhance its position in the cyber world by conducting mass surveillance is intriguing. Hence, it becomes necessary for nations like Russia to restrict their citizens’ usage of foreign internet and communication services so as to avoid the unauthorised surveillance of their citizens’ data by other nations, particularly the U.S.

Mass surveillance is the intricate surveillance of the whole or substantial fraction of a populace. It is often conducted or controlled by the government and is done concerning the security of its nation. To avoid the misuse of the data retrieved, every nation has its own set of rules controlling such surveillance activities. However, according to Harding, the way the U.S   retrieves users’ data globally is against the laws of other nations. Harding also points out that there are veiled and poorly examined laws in the U.S that justify such mass surveillance.

Surveillance are carried undercover; no one knows how and which data are retrieved. Recently, the Kaspersky lab has found out that the U.S has been embedding implants even in computers which are not connected to the internet (Perlroth & Sanger, 2015).These implants obtains encryption codes in a computer or could even crash “sophisticated” computers. This increases the vulnerability of not just users’ data but any nations’ official and private information which are now being stored on computers.

There is a possibility that for the U.S to even alter the data without anyone’s acknowledgement in the future, if the U.S easily gains access to the data, serviced by its company elsewhere. In the same way that a nation can determine the type information its citizens have access to on the internet, the U.S has the capability to exert such control over other nations without their acknowledgement.

In Russia, apart from the urge to use domestic internet and communication services, the surveillance activities by the U.S are closely watched and studied. Investing in the study of U.S surveillance activities helps countries to take required precautions to avoid further impinging of their data in the future and develop more sophisticated anti-spy ware technologies (Perlroth & Sanger, 2015). These steps cannot completely liberate a nation from the surveillance of the U.S but could reduce the extent of being tapped.

In conclusion, U.S companies are well established across the globe and that their services cannot be easily replaced by domestic companies in other countries (Morozov, 2015). Hence, the only immediate way to reduce mass surveillance is by restricting the usage of foreign internet and communication services in one’s nation. Meanwhile, other nations should invest in the development of their technological and communication sector to slowly move the American companies from their territory.

(590 words)

REFERENCE:

 1)     Morozov, E. (2015, January 4). Who’s the true enemy of the internet freedom – China, Russia, or the U.S? The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/04/internet-freedom-china-russia-us-google-microsoft-digital-sovereignty

 2)     Perlroth, N., & Sanger, D. E. (2015, February 16). U.S. embedded spyware overseas, report claims. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/17/technology/spyware-embedded-by-us-in-foreign-networks-security-firm-says.html

3) Harding, P. (2015, January 26). Mass surveillance is fundamental threat to human rights, says European report. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/26/mass-surveillance-threat-human-rights-council-europe