Samuel Katama Ngumbau

Instructions Is Privacy Legal? Essay #1 - Is Privacy Legal? Should it be illegal for computer or cell phone companies to use any encryption system that they cannot break, so that law enforcement can look at the information? I.e., should it be illegal for computer or cell phone manufacturers to have unbreakable codes on their products? Look at both sides of the question, come up with a conclusion, and justify it. The essay should have at least four references. Essay Format: All essays will be four pages plus a separate Works Cited page, using the MLA format, 9th edition. Four pages means anything from 3-1/2 pages to 4-1/2 pages. For proper MLA format, you can go to the OWL (Purdue Online Writing Lab) at https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_formatting_and_style_guide.html It will show you how to format any kind of reference you can possibly think of. Many other good references and utilities for the MLA format are available on the Internet. One good one is the MLA page at https://style.mla.org All sources should be cited in the paper and listed on the Works Cited page at the end of the paper. Anything in the essay that came from some source should have a reference to that source. For any reference you list at the end of the paper, I should be able to find where in your paper you used it. Wikipedia references may not be used.   General Format: ● No title page. Use MLA “Heading and Title” and “Running Head With Page Numbers” as given at https://style.mla.org/formatting-papers/#runningheadpagenumbers. ● The body of the text should be double spaced, 12-point type, 1" margins. Any legible font is acceptable. ● A separate Works Cited page, listing all works cited. Student’ First Name, Middle Initial(s), Last Name Professor’s Name Course Number and Name Assignment Due Date Is Privacy Legal? Mobile Tech companies that build unbreakable encryption codes in mobile and computer systems promote personal data safety against phishing and smishing fraudulent attacks from hackers. Unbreakable computer system security networks are prohibited by the U.S. Federal government and law enforcement units. That is because they pose a national security threat; hence cybercrimes are susceptible to occur when terrorists use laptops, mobile devices, and computers to launch cyber terror attacks. In another perspective, unbreakable computer network security protocols enhance the safety of users because another entity can't tap their communications except for the manufacturer. Phishing and smishing attacks are likely to occur in computer networks with unbreakable encryption networking; thus, the FBI, BJS, and Law enforcement agencies can't track the hackers and issue warrants of arrest. “Homomorphic encryption is a solution which allows performing computations directly on cipher text without decrypting of the cipher-text” (Sethi et al. 7). Some technology companies have been investigated and suspected to have funding collaboration with militia terror groups like; Al Qaeda, Hamas, ISIS, Taliban, and Al Shaabab; thus, unbreakable computer networks become risks to cyber terrorism in mobile and computer users. Wi-Fi unsecured connections are risks to malicious hacking; hence, hackers can control electric doors and electronic systems within a business entity for terrorist attack objectives in political motive, monetary gain, hero-worship, vengeance, and vandalism. It is illegitimate for technological companies to update Software security encryptions and versions of their computer networks without informing the law enforcement entities (Galai 20). Thus, deploying new security passwords and codes in their computer servers secures customer information from being breached and shared with other users. For instance, unbreakable data encryption codes become risks to computer users because hackers can hack the systems and execute their intentions without being countered and investigated by federal criminal investigation units. The NSA surveillance against cybercrimes is unauthorized in Apple, Huawei, and other mobile technologies, and users can't have their information tracked, trapped, and investigated. The U.S. law enforcement units illegalized Huawei 5G network trade deals within the U.S. territories and disadvantaged its citizens and diplomatic allies from purchasing Huawei 5G network because it posed a variety of cyber insecurities among mobile users. They scrutinized that Huawei 5G network encryption exposed customers' information, emails, and passwords, making them at risk of insecurity and malicious access. (Umadevi, et al. 15). “US National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien has warned UK about allowing China’s Huawei Technologies Co Ltd (HWT.UL) into its 5G telecommunications networks, saying such a move would pose a risk to UK’s secret intelligence services’’. During the Trump regime, China-based technological companies were sanctioned against standardizing and marketing their products in the U.S. territory. That was because the NSA recommended weakened computer system encryption to access companies' operations and identify messaging information navigated to cause external and internal threats to the National Security. Disclosing personal confidential information to the Federal law enforcement systems is against personal privacy; hence the U.S. federal government should lessen its national security laws to allow its citizens to enjoy the right to privacy and protect personal information. On the contrary, the Huawei network has established strong encryption networks among its mobile users, impeding the U.S. from accessing its servers. The decryption of computer servers is vital for the law enforcement unit to analyze its system operations and misinformation that can lead to a terror attack, violent extremism, exposure to hazardous radiation rays and insurgency among the U.S. nationals. “The use of plain radiography and CT units can expose patients into cancerous medical radiations; hence the FDA agency should be granted decryption of medical technology websites to investigate radiation overexposures and quality of PCT scan service offered” (Wijetunga et al. 883). Provision of computer unbreakable encryption protocols develops organizational privacy in its operations, profits, management, employees, and security passcodes to access bank's servers; therefore, it's not illegal to protect confidential information from public disclosure. Perhaps, the NSA surveillance system purports to prevent cyber terrorism through strategic, operational, and tactical intelligence gathering from mobile phones and computer networking. It's legitimate and sensitive to allow Federal authorities to access computer servers within a mobile technological entity although, it is illegitimate and a breach of customer's privacy. The Federal Law permits technological companies to have responsible encryption to ensure the FBI's access. They shouldn't harden their network encryption because it risks cybercrime among terrorist syndicates using high security encrypted mobile phones. It is unjustifiable to have end-to-end encryption among smartphone users because the law enforcement units can't obtain information even with a court order. It is justifiable for a company to have unbreakable computer encryption because they safeguard companies' assets, profits and security store systems to prevent unwarranted attacks from malicious individuals leading to severe financial loss. In 2017, the FBI recommended organizational responsibility to decrypt their computer servers and have federal law enforcement's authorization to access their servers and analyze security threats and criminal evidence of planned criminal attacks. For example, anonymous individuals normally send messages of terror threats to organizations. Then, the technological management unit within the organization may take time to analyze the name of the sender location and become victimized without the know-how of the FBI and BJS Department. “NSA has decrypted a number of interesting targets deemed by product lines to have high potential as sources of intelligence” (Pradhan et al.10). Thus, it is critical and legitimate for technological companies to permit law enforcement units access to information in their computer servers. In banking institutions, money laundering is a common criminal phenomenon where criminals deposit lump sum money into different accounts in the same bank account or varying bank accounts in different banking organizations within a given geographical location. Thus, banking organizations should partner with law enforcement agencies to decrypt their mobile app servers and allow proper forensic screening and analysis of information; hence, money launderers can be investigated, arrested, and prosecuted in a court of law. The FBI suggests that mobile manufacturers keep records of decryption messages to allow access for law enforcement to investigate circumstances of violations against the federal law. Through that, they can establish information leading to arms trafficking, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, terror threats, among other criminal offenses contrary to the U.S. constitution. The U.S. law enforcement and regulatory agencies enforces the Bank Secrecy Act Data suggesting, “FBI should be granted access to electronic copies of BSA filings to be imported into an FBI data warehouse. This platform allows specific data fields to be extracted and compared against investigative information and intelligence collected by the FBI and other agencies”. In conclusion, it is justifiable for a mobile manufacturer to decrypt information to allow exceptional access by law enforcement system agencies to prevent cyber terrorism. Although, it poses a great risk to the organization because an additional party escrow agent can make it vulnerable to losing its assets. For example, some Cybercrime professionals within the FBI might have financial motives and collaborate with Russia in sharing log in codes to tech companies’ server to access customer's data; hence, they can retaliate and cause fraudulent intentions and hack the companies’ computer software. Works Cited Galai, Katerina. "Private military companies, a contemporary problem?" Regulating Private Military Companies, 2019, pp. 11-32. Pradhan, Ankit, et al. "Smart Grid Data Security using Practical CP-ABE with Obfuscated Policy and Outsourcing Decryption." 2020 International Conference on Cyber Situational Awareness, Data Analytics and Assessment (CyberSA), 2020, pp. 1-13. Sethi, Kamalakanta, et al. "A novel implementation of parallel homomorphic encryption for secure data storage in cloud." 2017 International Conference on Cyber Security And Protection Of Digital Services (Cyber Security), 2017, pp. 1-10. Umadevi, K. S., et al. "Digital Forensics and Cyber Law Enforcement." Countering Cyber Attacks and Preserving the Integrity and Availability of Critical Systems, vol. 334, 2019, pp. 1-20. Wijetunga, Chatura, et al. "Responsible use of advanced imaging technology. How well are risks and benefits of radiation recognised?" Injury, vol. 49, no. 5, 2018, pp. 883-884.