Annotated Bibliography On Computer Science Majors

Both National Security and individual privacy were massively affected by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In a matter of minutes, four airplanes were

On September 11th, 2001 the future of the United States changed forever. With almost 3,000 people dying from a terrorist attack that spanned the Eastern U.S., new tactics had to be created to prevent an event like this from ever happening again. Forty-five days after the attack, the USA Patriot Act was passed (Source 5). While only some Americans approved of it, the act was created to protect from terrorism across the country.

For many, the idea that government could could have access to all of an individual's personal information by manipulation of ciphertext is a violation of free speech. The applicable part of the First Amendment here prohibits the making of any law, "abridging the freedom of speech” (The First Amendment). There are an abundance of ways to communicate, we can write words, we can talk, we can take photographs, we can draw pictures. The Northwest Public Radio (NPR) published the article, “ Apple's First Amendment Argument” it states that, “during the 1990’s. There was a confrontation in court on whether code, or encryption, is a form of speech”. A student at University of California by the name of Daniel Bernstein, created an encryption software called Snuffle. He attempted to put it on the Internet, the government made an effort to stop him, using laws that were meant for the restrictions of firearms and ammunitions. Eric Goldman is a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law argued in the NPR article, “In Fighting FBI, Apple Says Free Speech Rights Mean No Forced Coding” that Daniel Bernstein's code was a “form of speech and therefore protected by the Constitution”. Goldman was saying “I believe that privacy is important and I'm going to use this software as a platform to protect this right”. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledged that software is a form of speech and has been treated as such ever since. Therefore if software code is speech, Apple claims the First Amendment also means the government cannot force Apple to comply with its cause. The FBI wants Apple to write software code to help it break into the iPhone. The opposing side of this argument is lead by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The government is concerned that technology’s security will prevent them from maximizing the safety of the U.S. citizens.

The NSA performed an unlawful invasion of privacy by using web encryption. Technologist, Christopher Soghoian, states that the NSA used supercomputers to gain access to encryption that provides online privacy and security. “The encryption technologies that the NSA has exploited to enable its secret dragnet surveillance are the same technologies that protect our most sensitive information, including medical records, financial transactions and commercial secrets” (qtd. in Winter). Christopher’s explanation of the encryption technologies describes how anyone could be affected by this surveillance. This is considered unlawful because the NSA hacked technologies that protect our private information. This affects the security of the nation knowing that it is possible for someone to gain access to information that people have once though were private to them. This is not the first time that the NSA has tried to gain access to private information. In fact, “For the past decade, NSA has led an aggressive multipronged effort to break widely used internet encryption technologies”

Ever since the cloudy day on September 11, 2001, when two planes crashed into the twin towers, the United States government has been cracking down on security. The Patriot Act, passed October 26, 2001, was an effort by the United States government to ‘crack down’ on terrorism. The act removed several legal barriers that blocked or restricted law enforcement, intelligence, and defense agencies from storing data about possible terrorist threats and collaborating together to respond to them. The Patriot Act was supposed to make United States citizens feel more secure but in reality it had the opposite effect. Around 2013, when confidential NSA documents were leaked it was found that several government agencies had used the guise of the Patriot Act to monitor millions of United States citizens. In fact, it was found out by several civil liberties groups that the Patriot Act applies to more than just terrorist acts. For example, Title II of the Patriot Act allows government agencies to tap telephone lines and permits the interception of messages that may be relevant to a criminal investigation. Further, the act allows authorities to provide access to any tangible thing(books, records, papers, etc). Today, March 2, 2016, fifteen years after the government was given permission to spy on most of its citizens, the government is trying to spy on all Apple iPhones through the use of a code cracking software.

Many innocent Americans lives were taken by an act of terrorism on September 11, 2001. This has terrorized many people who lost loved ones on this day. There was much controversy among the government’s officials and American citizens on what the course of action is to prevent this tragedy from happening again. After many days of formulating a plan, A bill was passed on October 26, 2001 by George W. Bush to help solve this issue. This new regulation became know as the Patriot Act. This bill provided the government the necessary tools to intercept American citizens private information, which would help discover suspicious activity among suspected terrorists threats. The main bill’s focus was to help prevent future terrorists from executing their malicious attacks. Despit the law’s ability to keep this country safe, we sacrifice some of our freedom for the good of each of us. Although the American government has retrieved personal information throughout history, our civil liberties should be preserved along with the safety of our exclusive information from the United States government.

Thomas Jefferson said, “My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.” The National Security Agency (NSA), established by the National Security Act of 1947, exists to safeguard American citizens against terror threats and foreign intelligence.(National Archives) Since the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001, the NSA, through the guise of the Patriot Act, has been investigating American citizens who are not suspect of law breaking. President George W. Bush enacted the Patriot Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 [Britannica]) in October 2001, but current President Barack Obama furthered its parameters via Executive Orders such as EO’s 13526 and 13549 (Federal Register). The Agency’s private investigations have caused public suspicion. This concern was validated by the revelation of the government’s collection of metadata (phone history), storage of text messages, possession of spy programs, and proof of the wire tapping of two-country related phone calls after Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, leaked private information to the public in May/June of 2013. (Britannica)

November 4, 1952. World War II had just ended with the Allied Forces claimed as the victors, mass hysteria flooded the United States of America and the president was tasked with creating an organization that prevented brutal attacks from being executed to the American people (Frequently…). The president at the time, Harry S. Truman, established what has in recent light become one of the most controversial American governmental agencies known as the National Security Agency, NSA for short. Recent leaks by the likes of Edward Snowden and court cases have shown citizens that allowing the government to track all of their information has not helped prevent terrorist actions. America as a whole needs to realize that spying, the one thing that it so heavily despises, is the thing that is taking our freedom away. If the government has access to all personal information, what is going to stop a hacker from getting that? It is one thing to submit and allow for your information to be tracked, but to have your consent taken away does not justify the “safety” provided. It’s clear to see that since its conception, the NSA has allowed far too many attacks to occur while strengthening its spying power. Let’s first delve into why the NSA was created and what their purpose is/was.

In the aftermath of 9/11, the American government passed the Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act to prevent future attacks and catch terrorists, but instead these acts led to the decline of the freedom of Americans. The USA Patriot Act is an acronym that stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism and was passed on October 26, 2001 to expand the tools that law enforcement agencies had in fighting terrorists. The act armed law enforcement with tools for surveillance of terrorists, such as wiretaps and access to business documents. Theoretically, these additions to the law would allow for terrorists to be apprehended before they would attack. In an NSA manual, called “Transition 2001”, the agency detailed their plans for fighting terrorists in the 21st century. The manual detailed a new mission statement for American intelligence, “Intelligence and information systems security complement each other. Intelligence gives the nation an information advantage over its adversaries. Information systems security prevents others from gaining advantage over the nation. Together

Encryption in the book Blown to Bits by Hal Abelson, Ken Ledeen, and Harry Lewis is a brief recap of what happened before privacy became significant for people around the world. The industry and technological advancements for encryption began with the Egyptians who ciphered their language in Hieroglyphics around 2000 years ago. This creation led to a problematic industry in the Information Age because of hackers abusing privacy. Though the fraudulent consequences of privacy are not protected by any amendment limitless resistance to being exposed to personal information has been growing ever since the beginning of security standards. What happened on September 11th, 2001 was not merely an inevitable catastrophe because the FBI warned the US Government and president years before 911 occurred. Encryption being a safety requirement in our era is the encoding of the data transferring through communicative means. Anyone can have access to the data, however, there is a password when trying to steal or intercept someone 's information. The best way to encode your translation of personal information between two or more people is by verbal communication through whispers and speaking softly. Regulating encryption has always been a request from the NSA and the FBI because of exchanging violent plans or initiatives to seek perilous outcomes. The government disrupts personal privacy because the problem has occurred around 200 years later and was not protected by the Founding Fathers or

This source is a primer for the members of Congress and members of the Homeland Security Committee. As such, it provides details on the state of the encryption debate in the United States. It makes seven findings. First, encryption plays a

In 1991 An ambitious senator named Joe Biden introduced legislation declaring that telecommunications companies “shall ensure” that their hardware includes backdoors for government eavesdropping (Declan). The proposal by Joe Biden was then followed by the clipper chip by the NSA and a bill approved by the House of representatives committee in 1997. It said that all encryption had to have backdoors for the government. Later that year it failed. The Silicon Valley firms told politicians that encryption was on web browsers. That then lead to the USA Patriot

The attacks of September 11, 2001 on the World Trade Center triggered the passing of the USA Patriot Act “to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes."1 It passed quickly and with little debate. Soon, encryption of information became a topic to address and efforts took place to allow the government backdoor access to anything encrypted by products developed within the United States. This generated much controversy and was opposed by many organizations. It did not take long before the supporters of these encryption bills backed down.

Today, with all the chaos and terrorist attacks and cyber-attacks going on in the world there are many security issues that companies and governments are being faced with. There are several questions that need to be answered if we are going to solve these problems. The main question that I will be covering is, should the government be proactive in the area of encryption of data due to the possibility of criminal activity going undetected? The major area within this problem I believe is the fourth amendment issues because as Benjamin Franklin once stated, "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety." We as a country need to be very careful when dealing with this area

The cause of terrorist attacks like 9/11 tragedy the government has ramped ups the security and surveillance of the activist, journalist and dissidents. It is no secret that the government are able to have assess of people phone call records and text messages but for that reason that, activists avoid using telephones, instead they use tools like Skype. Which they think they are immune to interception but they are wrong. Over the last years there has been an industry of companies who provide surveillance technology to the government, technology that allows the government to hack into computers. Rather that intercepting the commutations as they go over the wire, instead the government now hacks into your computer, enable your webcam and your microphone and able to steal and look through documents from your computer. In the article “ Quasi- Constitutional Protection and Government Surveillance” by Emily Berman argues “ The government may collect and analyze unprecedented amounts of information about U.S persons’ communications, but without concomitant safeguards against infringing on individual privacy” (781). According to this, it indicates that all the access the government is able to see and how it is invading American’s privacy.