We are anonymous, we are legion

Young Scholar Tutorials

praskrishna — 2013-09-30T11:21:25Z

Communication Policy Research South organised this workshop on September 3 and 4, 2013. Nehaa Chaudhari participated in the event organised by CPR South.

Rohan Samarajiva, Christoph Stork, Marcio Aranha, Ang Peng Hwa, and Sujata Gamage were the speakers. Unedited notes from the workshop can be accessed by clicking on the links below:

CPR South Tutorial Note (1)
CPR South Tutorial Note (2)

Click to read the original here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/young-scholar-tutorials

You will need a license to create a WhatsApp group in Kashmir

praskrishna — 2016-04-21T02:34:46Z

The internet rights activists have criticised the move stating it as unconstitutional.

The article was published by Governance Now on April 19, 2016. Pranesh Prakash tweeted on this.

Moving beyond internet ban, Kashmir’s Kupwara district issued a notice asking all admins of WhatsApp news groups to register their groups with the district authority within ten days.

With this move, the authorities are taking power in their hands to monitor WhatsApp news groups owned by private individuals. However, internet rights activists criticised it saying the move is unconstitutional as it breaches freedom of speech.

The circular is issued under the subject of ‘registering of WhatsApp news group and restrictions for spreading rumours thereof’. The district magistrate said that any spread of information by these WhatsApp news groups, “leading to untoward incidents will be dealt under the law”.

You may need a license in Kashmir to run a WhatsApp group

The valley witnessed five-day internet shutdown following the Handwara firing incident. Internet ban is a common phenomenon in Kashmir.

“For how long will the government decide whether we can communicate with each other or not? Actually, the authorities do not want us to spread the truth about the army’s atrocities far and wide,” said a resident of Handwara as quoted in Kashmir Reader.

Earlier, parts of Haryan and Gujarat also witnessed internet ban during Jat and Patidar agitation, respectively.

Blocking all internet access is clearly an unnecessary and disproportionate measure that cannot be countenanced as a ‘reasonable restriction’ on freedom of expression and the right to seek and receive information, which is an integral part of the freedom of expression,” said Pranesh Prakash.

For instance, he adds, a riot-affected woman seeking to find out the address of the nearest hospital cannot do so on her phone. “Instead of blocking access to the internet, the government should seek to quell rumours by using social networks to spread the truth, and by using social networks to warn potential rioters of the consequences,” he said.

Former Mumbai police commissioner Rakesh Maria used WhatsApp to counter rumours spread after circulation of a fake photo in January 2015.

“The way in which the ban is imposed is unreasonable. Problem is in the method that is being used in absence of guidelines, defining circumstances under which they can impose a restriction on internet sites,” says Arun Kumar, head of cyber initiatives at Observer Research Foundation (ORF).

If government formulates these rules or guidelines it will set a threshold for state or central authorities, which will define the urgency of imposing ban on internet services.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/governance-now-april-19-2016-you-will-need-a-license-to-create-whatsapp-group-in-kashmir

You Have the Right to Remain Silent

nishant — 2013-07-22T06:59:53Z

Reflecting upon the state of freedom of speech and expression in India, in the wake of the shut-down of the political satire website narendramodiplans.com.

Nishant Shah's column was published in Down to Earth on July 17, 2013.

It took less than a day for narendramodiplans.com, a political satire website that had more than 60,000 hits in the 20 hours of its existence, to be taken down. A simple webpage that showed a smiling picture of Narendra Modi, the touted candidate for India’s next Prime Ministerial campaign, flashing his now trademark ‘V’ for ~~Vengeance~~ Victory sign. At the first glimpse it looked like another smart media campaign by the net-savvy minister who has already made use of the social web quite effectively, to connect with his constituencies and influence the younger voting population in the country. Below the image of Mr. Modi was a text that said, "For a detailed explanation of how Mr. Narendra Modi plans to run the nation if elected to the house as a Prime Minister and also for his view/perspective on 2002 riots please click the link below." The button, reminiscent of 'sale' signs on shops that offer permanent discounts, promised to reveal, for once and for all, the puppy plight of Mr. Modi's politics and his plans for the country that he seeks to lead.

However, when one tried to click on the button, hoping, at least for a manifesto that combined the powers of Machiavelli with the sinister beauty of Kafka, it proved to be an impossible task. The button wiggled, and jiggled, and slithered all over the page, running away from the mouse following it. Referencing the layers of evasive answers, the engineered Public Relations campaigns that try to obfuscate the history to some of the most pointed questions that have been posited to the Modi government through judicial and public forums, the button never stayed still enough to actually reveal the promised answers. For people who are familiar with the history of such political satire and protest online would immediately recognise that this wasn’t the most original of ideas. In fact, it was borrowed from another website - http://www.thepmlnvision.com/ that levelled similar accusations of lack of transparency and accountability on the part of Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan. Another instance, which is now also shut down, had a similar deployment where the webpage claimed to give a comprehensive view into Rahul Gandhi’s achievements, to question his proclaimed intentions of being the next prime-minister. In short, this is an internet meme, where a simple web page and a java script allowed for a critical commentary on the future of the next elections and the strengthening battle between #feku and #pappu that has already taken epic proportions on Twitter.

The early demise of these two websites (please do note, when you click on the links that the Nawaz Sharif website is still working) warns us of the tightening noose around freedom of speech and expression that politicos are responsible for in India. It has been a dreary last couple of years already, with the passing of the Intermediaries Liabilities Rules as an amendment to the IT Act of India, Dr. Sibal proposing to pre-censor the social web in a quest to save the face of erring political figures, teenagers being arrested for voicing political dissent, and artists being prosecuted for exercising their rights to question the state of governance in our country. Despite battles to keep the web an open space that embodies the democratic potentials and the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and expression in the country, it has been a losing fight to keep up with the ad hoc and dictatorial mandates that seem to govern the web.


Above is a screen shot from narendramodiplans.com website

We have no indication of why this latest piece of satirical expression, which should be granted immunity as a work of art, if not as an individual’s right to free speech, was suddenly taken down. The website now has a message that says, “I quit. In a country with freedom of speech, I assumed that I was allowed to make decent satire on any politician more particularly if it is constructive. Clearly, I was wrong.” The web is already abuzz with conspiracy theories, each sounding scarier than the other because they seem so plausible and possible in a country that has easily sacrificed our right to free speech and expression at the altar of political egos. And whether you subscribe to any of the theories or not, whether your sympathies lie with the BJP or with the UPA, whether or not you approve of the political directions that the country seems to be headed in, there is no doubt that you should be as agitated as I am, about the fact that we are in a fast-car to blanket censorship, and we are going there in style.

What happens online is not just about this one website or the one person or the one political party – it is a reflection on the rising surveillance and bully state that presumes that making voices (and sometimes people) invisible, is enough to resolve the problems that they create. And what happens on the web is soon going to also affect the ways in which we live our everyday lives. So the next time, you call some friends over for dinner, and then sit arguing about the state of politics in the country, make sure your windows are all shut, you are wearing tin-foil hats and if possible, direct all conversations to the task of finally finding Mamta Kulkarni. Because anything else that you say might either be censored or land you in a soup, and the only recourse you might have would be a website that shows the glorious political figures of the country, with a sign that says “To defend your right to free speech and expression, please click here”. And you know that you are never going to be able to click on that sign. Ever.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/down-to-earth-july-17-2013-nishant-shah-you-have-the-right-to-remain-silent

You Have the Right to Remain Silent

anja — 2011-08-02T07:55:22Z

India has a long history of censorship that it justifies in the name of national security. But new laws governing the Internet are unreasonable and — given the multitude of online voices — poorly thought out, argues Anja Kovacs in this article published in the Sunday Guardian on 17 April 2011.

In March 2011, Indian media - both social and traditional - was ablaze with fears that a new set of rules, proposed to complement the IT (Amendment) Act 2008, would thwart the freedom of expression of India's bloggers: contrary to standard international practice, the Intermediary Due Dilligence Rules seemed intent on making bloggers responsible for comments made by readers on their site. Only a few weeks earlier, the threat of online censorship had manifested itself in a different form: although the block was implemented unevenly, mobile applications market space Mobango, bulk SMS provider Clickatell, hacking-related portal Zone-H.com and blogs hosted on Typepad were suddenly no longer accessible for most Indian netizens, without warning or explanation.

Censorship in India is nothing new. At the time of Independence, there was widespread fear among its lawmakers that unrestricted freedom of expression could become a barrier to the social reforms necessary to put the country on Nehru's path to development – particularly as the memory of Partition continued to be vivid. Although freedom of expression is guaranteed by the Constitution, it is therefore subject to a fairly extensive list of so-called "reasonable" restrictions: the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence. But while this long list might have made sense at the time of Partition, in the mature democracy that India has now become, its existence, and the numerous opportunities for censorship and surveillance that it has enabled or justified, seems out of place. Indeed, though all these restrictions in themselves are considered acceptable internationally, there are few other democratic states that include all of them in the basic laws of their land.

An appetite for censorship does not only exist among India's legislature and judiciary, however. Especially since the early nineties, instances of vigilante groups destroying art, preventing film screenings, or even attacking offending artists, writers and editors have become noteworthy for their regularity. But it is worth noting that even more progressive sections of society have not been averse to censorship: for example, section of the Indian feminist movement have voiced strong support for the Indecent Representation of Women Act that seeks to censor images of women which are derogatory, denigrating or likely to corrupt public morality.

What connects all these efforts? A belief that suppressing speech and opinions makes it possible to contain the conflicts that emanate from India's tremendous diversity, while simultaneously ensuring its homogenous moral as much as political development. But if the advent of satellite television already revealed the vulnerabilities of this strategy, the Internet has made clear that in the long term, it is simply untenable. It is not just that the authors of a speech act may not be residents of India; it is that everybody can now become an author, infinitely multiplying the number of expressions that are produced each year and that thus could come within the Law's ambit. In this context, even if it may still have a role, suppression clearly can no longer be the preferred or even dominant technology of choice to manage disagreements. What is urgently needed is the building of a much stronger culture of respectful disagreement and debate within and across the country's many social groups. If more and more people are now getting an opportunity to speak, what we need to make sure is that they end up having a conversation.

Yet the government of India so far has mostly continued on the beaten track, putting into place a range of legislations and policies to meticulously monitor and police the freedom of expression of netizens within its borders. Thus, for example, section 66F(1)(B) of the IT (Amendment) Act 2008 defines "cyberterrorism" so broadly as to include the unauthorised access to information on a computer with a belief that that information may be used to cause injury to...decency or morality. The suggested sentence may extend to imprisonment for life. The proposed Intermediary Due Dilligence Rules 2011 privatise the responsibility for censorship by making intermediaries responsible for all content that they host or store, putting unprecedented power over our acts of speech into the hands of private bodies. The proposed Cyber Cafe Rules 2011 order that children who do not possess a photo identity card need to be accompanied by an adult who does, constraining the Internet access of crores of young people among the less advantaged sections of society in particular. And while the US and other Western countries continue to debate the desireability of an Internet Kill Switch, the Indian government obtained this prerogative through section 69A of the IT (Amendment Act) 2008 years ago.

Such measures are given extra teeth by being paired with unprecedented systems of surveillance. For example, there are proposals on the table that make it obligatory for telecommunication carriers and manufacturers of telecommunications equipment to ensure their equipment and services have built-in surveillance capabilities. While at present, records are only kept if there is a specific requirement by intelligence or security agencies, the Intelligence Bureau has proposed that ISPs keep a record of all online activities of all customers for at least six months. The IB has also suggested putting into place a unique identification system for all Internet users, whereby they would be required to submit some form of online identification every time they go online.

Proponents of such legislation often point to the new threats to safety and security that the Internet poses to defend these measures, and it is indeed a core obligation of any state to ensure the safety of its citizens. But the hallmark of a democracy is that it carefully balances any measures to do so with the continued guarantee of its citizens' fundamental rights. Despite the enormous changes and challenges that the Internet brings for freedom of expression everywhere, such an exercise seems to sadly not yet have been systematically undertaken in India so far.

The recent blocking of websites with which we started this article reflects the urgent need to do so. In response to RTI applications by the Centre for Internet and Society and Medianama, the Department of Information Technology, which is authorised to order such blocks, admitted to blocking Zone-H, but not any of the other websites affected earlier this year. In an interview with The Hindu, the Department of Telecommunication too had denied ordering the blocking of access, despite the fact that some users trying to access Typepad had reported seeing the message "this site has been blocked as per request by Department of Telecom" on their screen. In the mean time, Clickatell and Mobango remain inaccessible for this author at the time of writing. That we continue to be in the dark as to why this is so in the world's largest democracy deserves to urgently become a rallying point.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/your-right-to-remain-silent

You can still get into trouble for online posts: Digital law experts

praskrishna — 2015-04-02T01:44:32Z

The internet in India is freer now, but individuals could still to get into trouble for online posts, say digital media and law experts. Hailing the Supreme Court judgment on Tuesday as a landmark verdict for free speech in India, experts who have closely read the judgment say there is much to be careful about too.

The article by Kim Arora was published in the Times of India on March 30, 2015. Sunil Abraham is quoted.

The scrapping of the contentious section doesn't mean that one has a free run, cautions Sunil Abraham, executive director, Centre for Internet and Society. An online comment can still land you in jail, he says.

"The judgement in no way means that speech on online platforms will be unregulated now. You can still be charged for pornography or voyeurism under the IT Act. There are many provisions in the Constitution and Indian Penal Code that the government can use to target people it wants to go after. You can be still charged for hate speech or defamation - which is a criminal offence in India - for an online comment," says Abraham.

While lawyer Apar Gupta found the judgment to be forward-looking, he pointed to Para 98 of the 120 page judgment, which addresses Article 14 of the Constitution regarding "discrimination" and talks of the distinction between online and other media.

"We make it clear that there is an intelligible differentia between speech on the internet and other mediums of communication for which separate offences can certainly be created by legislation," says the judgment. "The court has indicated that special offences can be created for the internet. Constant vigilance is the price of liberty. We need to constantly engage with these issues to keep the internet free," says Gupta.

The judgment has been praised for making a distinction between online posts and messages that pertain to advocacy, discussion and incitement. "This is an excellent decision. The SC is saying that no matter what the medium, we stand for constitutional rights. The judges were ready to listen, and ready to share their experience of using the internet also," says Mishi Choudhary, legal director at Software Freedom Law Center, adding, "It was a lost opportunity for the Modi government. They should have gotten rid of section 66 A themselves."

Section 69A of the Act, which stands as is, allows non-transparent blocking of online content in the interest of "sovereignty and integrity of India, defense of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to above." However, Choudhary says that since it is a narrowly-drawn provision, it ensures more safeguards.

"It will be noticed that Section 69A unlike Section 66A is a narrowly drawn provision with several safeguards. First and foremost, blocking can only be resorted to where the Central Government is satisfied that it is necessary so to do. Secondly, such necessity is relatable only to some of the subjects set out in Article 19(2). Thirdly, reasons have to be recorded in writing in such blocking order so that they may be assailed in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution," she says.

Going forward, the government plan of action should focus on balancing safety and freedom on the internet, says Rajya Sabha MP Rajeev Chandrasekhar, who himself was one of the petitioners. "The final endgame has to be one where we have a new law or even a new IT Act which meets the twin objectives of a safe and free internet. The two need not be mutually exclusive," he says.

(With inputs from Anand J in Bengaluru)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/times-of-india-march-30-2015-kim-arora-you-can-still-get-into-trouble-for-online-posts

You Are Not the Only One: India stares at a loneliness epidemic

Admin — 2018-04-29T16:15:42Z

“To anyone looking at me from the outside, I seem like a fairly successful woman. I have a good job with great pay. I am in a relationship and have a bunch of close friends. I couldn’t figure out why I felt so angry or so lonely all the time.

The article by Asad Ali and Tabassum Barnagarwala was published in the Indian Express on April 29, 2018.

Most people will presume that throwing a bunch of hangers on the bed is a harmless act of venting. Akanksha Joshi knew it was the tipping point for her. Her mood swings had become more mercurial and she had been lashing out at people close to her or simply shutting herself in her room, watching Netflix for hours. But that day was different. “I had opened my cupboard and a hanger fell out. I don’t know what happened to me, but I suddenly picked up all the hangers and threw them on the bed in rage. The impulse lasted for 30 to 40 seconds, but it left me shaken. I had changed my job recently. It was a good one with great pay. It was what I wanted. I was in a relationship, had a bunch of close friends. I couldn’t figure out why I felt so angry or so lonely,” says Joshi, 32, who had moved to Mumbai from Dehradun in 2008 to look after her ageing grandparents and to work with a business process outsourcing firm.

The first inkling of trouble had come when her three-year-old marriage ended in divorce in 2013. Joshi underwent counselling for nearly two years, and, slowly, life seemed to get back on track. She entered into a new relationship, moved up the job ladder, formed new friendships. But the anger and the loneliness wouldn’t go. “To anyone looking at me from the outside, I seem like a fairly successful woman,” she says. But it has come at a cost.

In 2004, the National Sample Survey Office reported that 4.91 million people in India were living alone and suffered from loneliness. More recently, the National Mental Health Survey of India (2015-16) reported that high suicidal risk is an increasing concern in India; that children and adolescents are vulnerable to mental disorders; and, mental disorders, including depression and anxiety, affect nearly 10 per cent of the population. In 2016, the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies in partnership with Konrad Adenauer Stiftung conducted a survey of the attitudes, anxieties and aspirations of India’s young population (aged 15-34 years). The findings, released in April 2017, revealed that 12 per cent of the youth reported feeling depressed often, and 8 per cent said they felt lonely quite frequently.

“Youngsters who move from tier-II and III cities to metropolises find a sudden change in lifestyle. Even if you have friends, it is difficult to meet them in a city like Mumbai. Having a social life does not mean they have good social support,” says Dr Vishal Sawant, who is currently treating Joshi. When she first approached Dr Sawant, Joshi had great reservations. “Opening up to treatment makes you feel vulnerable. I am at a senior marketing position. To talk about mental health issues is also to put myself out in the open at this point in my career. But I knew I needed intervention,” she says. Now, after six months, she says her reactions to situations are more even.

In January this year, British Prime Minister Theresa May announced a minister for loneliness to address the condition that afflicts 14 per cent of UK’s population. In Japan, it has been an affliction that has affected generations. In India, though, conversations around mental health are only getting started. Apart from a lack of information and widespread social stigma, the cost of treatment also remains prohibitively expensive. Each session, depending on the therapist, may cost between Rs 2,000 and Rs 7,000. Besides the cost of medication, therapy and consultations, there is also the possibility of reduced work efficiency. In addition to these, despite multiple reports and surveys indicating that there might be a serious health problem at hand, the conversation around loneliness doesn’t go beyond conventional markers, such as the isolation of the elderly. But loneliness can be an equally debilitating experience for other demographies, including the youth. A 2010 research in the Indian Journal of Psychiatry finds that women suffer more from depression than men. The National Mental Health Survey (2015-16) in 12 states of India covering 39,532 people found that one in 20 people suffers from depression. “Depression was reported to be higher in females, in the age-group of 40-49 years and among those residing in urban metros,” the report observes.

In India, psychologists say, conversations around loneliness need to expand in scope and look at the condition born out of conflicts in gender identity, class, or isolation even within the framework of a family or a relationship. When 18-year-old Harshit Patel (name changed), a resident of south Mumbai’s plush Charni Road, visited psychiatrist Dr Sagar Mundada at his Fort clinic last November, he already had suicidal thoughts. He lived in a joint family of 10 in a well-to-do Gujarati household. He had just joined engineering college and was struggling to find his feet. Patel had tried discussing his feelings with his parents, but they had brushed it off as adolescent mood swings. They also refused to entertain thoughts of therapy when a tutor brought it up. Patel had called Mundada on his own, seeking help. The doctor advised him to call whenever he felt suicidal. Within 10 days, a call came: “Nobody notices me at home. What is the point of living?” Patel was contemplating throwing himself in front of a train, he said. Mundada immediately called him to his clinic and got in touch with his parents.

The road to therapy has been littered with obstacles for Patel. His parents are still not entirely convinced about therapy and refuse to attend sessions at the clinic. Instead, they meet at a McDonald’s outlet near the clinic.

Even as a 10-year-old child with a physically abusive father, Dharmesh Mekala knew — through all the loneliness and trauma that he hadn’t yet developed a vocabulary to articulate — that he had to escape. He wrote the entrance test for Navodaya Vidyalaya in Nalgonda, Telengana. “I just knew that I had to leave home somehow,” says Mekala, 29, a freelance artist, now based in Delhi. The arc of his loneliness had started developing early in his childhood — the beatings he received; the bouts of sadness that enveloped him; the isolation he felt from his family; and, finally, the suicidal thoughts that he had all the time.

Mekala made it to boarding school, but the reprieve that he had sought did not come to pass. His sense of isolation grew more acute when Mekala started discovering his sexuality, much later, he says, than his friends. By the time Mekala reached college he knew he was homosexual, but could not bring himself to admit it. “Being homosexual in a hetero world is a lonely life in any case, but when I first came to Delhi in 2010 — a dusky South Indian man with an accent, not well read or fluent in English, with far too little money — I felt adrift,” he says.

Dr Neetu Rana, psychologist at the Vidya Sagar Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Delhi, says, people like Mekala are more prone to mental health issues. “When we can’t find our social anchor we feel lonely. It could be a result of bullying, isolation and being ostracised, but it could also reflect changes in the family structures due to urbanisation and a shift towards an individualistic society,” she says.

More recently, the National Mental Health Survey of India (2015-16) reported that high suicidal risk is an increasing concern in India; that children and adolescents are vulnerable to mental disorders.

The UK-based National Society for the Prevention and Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) released data in 2017 on the number of calls received by its helpline to deal with loneliness. In 2016-17, the helpline counselled 4,063 children on loneliness, 73 per cent of whom were girls. Parul Tank, a psychiatrist who counsels students studying in a foreign country, says, many Indian students who venture abroad for higher studies, come to her with complaints of loneliness and depression. “In the US or UK, students have no structured classes. They lead an isolated life, the only idea of socialisation is to go out in cafes or pubs. Many do not know how to deal with this lifestyle,” she says.

Sahil, 45, a media professional, remembers how things started spiralling out of control for him when he went to London for a post-graduate degree. He had lived in Mumbai all his life and found London disconcerting. Soon, he wanted to “remain in my room all day” or spent time in the college library “figuring out a way to kill myself”. A friend took him to the university psychiatrist but the drugs he was prescribed didn’t help. By the time he came to Delhi in the mid-’90s for a job, he could barely hold it together; he had also become addicted to drugs and alcohol. “You feel lonely, and then you drink, and you feel even more lonely,” he says. Around this time, he got married. The thoughts of suicide receded somewhat, only to be replaced by an insatiable appetite for sex. “You don’t talk about things like loneliness when you are married. My wife and I never discussed my sex addiction either, though she was aware of it,” says Sahil, who is undergoing therapy at Sex Addicts Anonymous.

According to the Economic Survey 2016-17, the inter-state migration of workers in India has increased to 9 million annually during 2011-16 compared to previous years. A large section of these people leave their families behind in search of better prospects. In the hierarchy of visible discourse on loneliness, perhaps the migrant worker is the most affected, says Surinder Jodhka, professor of sociology at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. “The family structure is non-existent in the urban cities, and even in rural societies, there has been a disintegration. So, their feeling of loneliness is more pronounced.”

When his father died, Manik left his hometown in West Bengal’s Malda district for Delhi, more than 10 years ago. He was about 20 years old then. A distant uncle of his, a driver with a private company in the city, had promised to set him up with a job. But when Manik showed up, the uncle looked “surprised that I had actually come and grew distant.” Desperate, Manik began taking up odd jobs to survive. “I didn’t have friends and didn’t speak Hindi. The only person I knew refused to acknowledge me. I felt lonely and lost,” says Manik. He found a job as a cook/peon at a small company, but the pay was minimal and Manik says he spent it on “cheap alcohol and women”. “Otherwise, I’d be crying in my room all the time. I used to keep the radio on, not to feel less lonely but to not hear myself cry. I was so ashamed of my feebleness,” says Manik. He still can’t bear to be in a room without the radio on, but he doesn’t believe that his condition merits medical attention. In any case, it is a luxury he can’t afford. “It’s a personal battle, which only you can fight, no?” he asks.

A first-of-its-kind study conducted by Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, between October 2015 till September 2017 analysing patients in its major hospitals — KEM, Sion, Nair and RN Cooper — found that 31 per cent patients visiting these hospitals suffered from mental disorders. At least 1,70,000 patients attended these four major hospitals for psychiatric aid. Depression formed the second-most common mental disorder in out-patient departments forming 20 per cent of the total chunk. All of them came from a low income group. “We realised that there is a need to have more treatment facilities in primary healthcare centres for mental health. Rates of depression are high even in urban poor, and diagnosis shouldn’t be delayed until they reach a tertiary centre,” says dean of KEM hospital, Dr Avinash Supe. “For poor people, it is unemployment, frustrated political environment that affects their livelihood, that leads to depression. Take for instance, the farmers who are committing suicide. They feel isolated in the agrarian and financial distress, they have no one to seek aid from,” says Dr Vinayak Kale, head of psychiatry department in JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai. For affluent sections, he says, it’s the opposite. Steady career growth is not enough. The stress to win the corporate race often leads to loneliness.

One of the biggest contributors to loneliness, say psychologists and social scientists is our increasing reliance on technology. “One may have hundreds of friends on social media, but communication on that platform is virtual. Our culture is not individualised and we still need physical proximity. Social media has widened the gap of physical interaction,” says Dr Shubhangi Parkar, head of psychiatry at KEM hospital.

Nishant Shah, co-founder of The Centre for Internet and Society, Bengaluru, points out how “technologies have transformed what we understand as sociality, friendship and intimacy”. He says that young people — constant consumers of social media like Snapchat and WhatsApp — are “being told that they are always connected. Which means that they can, by definition, not feel lonely”. Yet, especially within the Indian context, says Shah, the pace of life and the rapid transformation of societies means that we no longer pay attention to the emotional needs of belonging, which actually alleviate loneliness. “We have replaced belonging with connectivity and this is going to have dire consequences in how we reshape our cities and lives,” he says.

Rachna Saxena (name changed), 31, agrees. Saxena migrated to Mumbai from a small town in Uttar Pradesh 14 years ago. “It was a big shift from the protective environment of home,” she says. She moulded herself to the demands of her new life once she joined the creative team in a multinational FMCG firm. She had been dating a Christian boy, but, at 28, when she finally broached the topic of marriage, the boy dithered on grounds of religious differences. The relationship crumbled, but something shifted inside her. “On Facebook, I’d look at photographs of my friends on their honeymoon. Everyone looked so happy, I felt depressed. I really wanted to get married, have a stable relationship. But that was just one part of my problems. I was a star performer at work, my social media feed showcased my ‘happening’ life, but no one could sense the immense pressure to live up to it,” she says.

Last year, a colleague she was close to died of a sudden heart attack at the age of 36. She saw his family squabble over property and his pregnant widow shunted out. “Another very close friend of mine, with whom I would share my distress, committed suicide. One fine day, he just shot himself,” says Saxena. She stopped meeting friends or inviting people over. In February this year, Saxena fell unconscious in her office. She had been sleeping fitfully and now had constant headaches. During her medical leave, she went home. “I ate and slept well, and, after a long time, felt happy. My parents are super supportive. But when I returned to Mumbai, it all came back. I realised I live two lives and I just couldn’t handle the stress of it,” she says. She started undergoing counselling sessions, and, a month ago, she deactivated her WhatsApp and Facebook accounts, choosing to travel and forge real friendships instead. “Now that I observe things more closely, I see that a lot of people around me are lonely even if they don’t look it. It can happen to anyone, you know,” she says.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/indian-express-asad-ali-tabassum-barnagarwala-april-29-2018-you-are-not-the-only-one-india-stares-at-a-loneliness-epidemic

Yes, You Can Get Arrested for a Facebook Status Update Now

praskrishna — 2012-11-30T08:16:20Z

A 21-year-old Indian woman thought Mumbai shouldn't have been shutdown for the funeral of an Islamophobic leader. Broadcasting such opinions on Facebook was apparently grounds for arrest.

The article by David Wagner was published in the Atlantic Wire on November 29, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

A Muslim graduate student, Shaheen Dhada posted a note (of her iPhone message) on her timeline November 18th, writing, "Every day thousands of people die, but still the world moves on ... Today, Mumbai shuts down out of fear, not out of respect." Her status was written in reference to the death of Bal Thackeray, the late leader of Hindu extremist group Shiv Sena, responsible for repeated waves violence against Muslims in the Maharashtra state, according to the BBC. Another 21-year-old woman, Rinu Shrinivasan, was also arrested by Indian police for stoking "religious enmity." She'd simply clicked "like" on Dhada's post.

A mob of angry Thackeray supporters thronged around the police station Dhada's house. Others vandalized her uncle's clinic two days after her arrest. Mumbai newspaper The Hindu reports today that charges have been dropped against the two arrested women, but those observing the case are worried about the precedent this sets for free speech in India. "I have 3,500 followers on Twitter, and I'm pretty sure I annoy 100 of them on a daily basis," says Centre for Internet and Society director Pranesh Prakash. But should that mean he and others in India should picture themselves in handcuffs every time they type a potentially controversial status update? Retired Supreme Court Justice Markandey Katju tells NPR's Julie McCarthy that, at least in this case, the arrest was totally inappropriate:

You can mourn a death in whichever way you want, but you can't bring a whole city to a stoppage. So what this girl wrote was in consonance with the verdict of the Supreme Court—nothing illegal.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-atlantic-wire-november-29-2012-david-wagner-you-can-get-arrested-for-facebook-status-update-now

WWW: The Hackers’ Haven

praskrishna — 2015-02-05T02:20:04Z

In an increasingly connected world, it pays to be careful when sharing personal information

This story by Abraham C. Mathews was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 09-02-2015. Sunil Abraham gave his inputs.

Last year, Whatsapp changed its encryption algorithm several times and, every time, it was breached,” says Saket Modi, hacker, entrepreneur and CEO of Lucideus Technologies, which just created an app that monitors wayward activity on your smartphone. That’s geekspeak for: “Your WhatsApp chats, including deleted ones, would have been accessible to any hacker worth his salt”. And we are talking about a company that was valued at $19 billion at some point during the year. Only in November 2014 did WhatsApp finally embrace end-to-end encryption, which will ostensibly address the issue.

Or take the sales claim that every smartphone purchaser has heard — “Android is safe from virus.” That’s not, however, what a joint study by security solutions company Kaspersky and Interpol found. In the first half of 2014, 1,75,442 unique malicious programmes targeted at Android were discovered. Clearly a tribute to the platform on which 85 per cent of smartphones run.

In a TEDx talk last year titled ‘What’s physically possible in the virtual world’, Modi demonstrated how, with access to your smartphone for barely 20 seconds, he can see everything that has ever happened on your phone — text messages, call log, browsing history, and so on. He also showed how fraudulent emails could be disguised so as to appear to have come from a yahoo.com email address, and how you could be hacked even without being connected to the Internet. “There are only two kinds of people in the world,” he says. “Those who know they have been hacked and those who don’t.”

Epidemic Proportions
For cyber security, 2014 was annus horribilis. From celebrities whose intimate pictures were dumped on the Internet, to corporates such as Sony, JP Morgan and Target whose records were hacked into and personal information of millions of their customers compromised, it was the year when the proverbial shit hit the fan. Details (names, numbers, even favourite pizza toppings) of six lakh customers of Domino’s Pizza in France and Belgium were stolen for a $40,000 ransom. One hundred and ten million records (credit card details, social security numbers, along with addresses) from Target were stolen. The company later admitted that its sales were “meaningfully weaker” after the data theft was disclosed. One hundred and forty-five million records were stolen from eBay, 109 million from Home Depot and 83 million from JP Morgan during the year.

In 2013, a group that calls itself the Syrian Electronic Army hacked into Swedish company TrueCaller’s database. TrueCaller, an app, allows you to identify phone numbers. The data is collected from the contact list of those who download the app, which means, it even has details of those who haven’t downloaded or used the app in any way. Estimates put the number of Indians whose numbers could have been stolen at a million.

Cyber security is not yet a boardroom topic, says Anil Bhasin, MD, India & Saarc, Palo Alto Networks, which claims to create comprehensive security solutions for users but is fast becoming one with the increase in security breach incidents. Enterprises still use legacy technology that at times is 20 years old, he says, giving the example of banks that sometimes have a layer-3 staple inspection firewall, when they should ideally be running on layer-7.

When companies store your information, you also benefit. For example, when an e-commerce company does so, online shopping becomes faster and easier. But these companies should invest in measures to protect the information, says Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore. But then again, he says, a lot of breaches, like the celebrity iCloud hack, happen because users are negligent with measures designed to protect them. Passwords, for instance.

A Pew Research report found that only four out of 10 Internet users changed passwords after the ‘heartbleed’ virus (which found a way to unlock encrypted data) was uncovered in April 2014. Only 6 per cent thought their information was stolen. But, in August, it emerged that a Russian crime ring had amassed 1.2 billion user name-password combinations of 500 million email addresses from 4,20,000 websites. A Kaspersky study found that the number of malicious programmes detected rose 10 times in just six months to 6,44,000 in March 2014. This shows the call for vigil cannot not be more critical.

Interestingly, your online financial payments may be relatively more secure, thanks to Reserve Bank of India’s dogged persistence in continuing with the two-step verification process for electronic payments (a one-time password and PIN verification). The central bank drew a lot of flak for barring taxi app Uber from storing payment information and automatically deducting charges at the end of a ride. But Modi isn’t impressed. He likens the two-step verification to a batsman going onto the pitch wearing just a helmet. “The rest of your body is still exposed,” he says.

Easy Targets
Here’s one easy hack that Modi describes. Any app that you download from the app store on your phone asks for a set of permissions, which mostly come as an ‘all or nothing’ option. You either grant all the access it asks for, or you can’t download the app. Suppose, you grant a scrabble app access to your text messages. Your number can then be accessed by the app provider. Now think about how your banking transactions are verified — with a one-time password sent as a text message. With access to your text messages, entering that password would hardly be a challenge for hackers, says Modi. Or, suppose you were to set up a new WhatsApp account with that same number. The verification, like we all know, comes through a one-time password sent to your number. With access to your text messages, the hacker is given a virtual key to your entire WhatsApp history.

Or, take for instance, an app that requests access to your SD card (the storage card in your phone). With that permission, the app gets access to everything on your SD card, including your most private photos. Modi’s company Lucideus recently came out with an app, UnHack, that scans your phone to see which apps can access what data. If you use the app, you will find that not only can Facebook access the call logs on your phone, but apps like Wunderlist (which organises to-do lists) and Pocket (which stores articles for future offline reading) can access your contacts as well. The apps from TED (of TED Talks fame) as well as Flipkart can see as well as edit your personal photos and documents.

Companies —Uber, for instance — have in the past been found to be frivolous with data collected. Late last year, Uber greeted a Buzzfeed reporter who had arrived at the company’s New York headquarters with “There you are — I was tracking you”. No prior permission was sought. A venture capitalist, Peter Sims, had written earlier that his exact whereabouts in New York were displayed to a room full of people as part of a demonstration at a company event in Chicago.

Information Overload
Adam Tanner, a Harvard fellow and a Forbes columnist, was at an annual conference of the Direct Marketers Association, where he noticed a list of names of 1.8 million people with erectile dysfunction (ED), along with their email addresses and numbers. The organisers claimed the details were volunteered by the people themselves. Knowing that ED is something that men rarely admit to, he made the organisers an offer — “Let me purchase a list of a thousand people, and write to them to see if they know that they are on such a list.” The organisers refused, saying it would be an immoral use of their data. From this, one can tell that the information came from websites that took their details, promising a cure.

This, and other similar anecdotes made their way to his recent book, What Stays in Vegas, which deals with the world of personal data and the end of privacy as we know it. When Tanner meets Indians, he brings up matrimonial websites. What surprises him is the volume of information that people disclose. To westerners, details such as sub-caste or blood type, as well as in many cases the admission that a person is HIV+ is an outright breach of privacy. That people would volunteer to put this out in public is shocking. “When you are looking for a suitable match, giving the information may be important at the moment, but you must not forget that once something is on the Internet, it can never be completely deleted,” he warns.

But what is the problem if somebody has all the details, you may ask. Is the potential risk greater than the possibility of a perfect match? A PTI report from 2009 talks about a confession by an Indian Mujahideen operative who used information from such sites to get a student identity card as well as a driving licence. Mukul Shrivastava, a partner in the forensic practice at EY, gives you another alarming scenario. Let’s say somebody trawls your Facebook, what is the amount of information that such a person can get access to? Your daily routine, your physical movement, your favourite restaurant or whether you will be at home at a certain time (from a status message like “Can’t wait to watch the Devils trouncing Liverpool at ManU Café tonight!”). Even if a physical attack is not on the agenda, much of the information can be used to guess security questions (favourite cat, first school) and find out required details for phone banking (date of birth, email address, mother’s name). An HDFC Bank official says there is a rise in vishing (the voice equivalent of phishing) attacks, where people with access to bank account numbers as well as personal details pose as bank executives and lure customers with special benefits and convince them to divulge their banking passwords.

Security is an individual’s responsibility, says Sunil Abraham. “You have to remember that you have volunteered to put the information online,” he says. Information once put online is not private anymore. It’s like making an announcement in a large hall that is broadcast on TV. That’s what the Internet is. And once the Internet gets to know, it can never really be forgotten, says Vishnu Gopal, chief technology officer at MobME, a mobile value-added services provider. It will be available on some weblink or at least on archive.org, which claims to have ‘435 billion pages saved over time’.

While reclaiming lost information might be difficult, one can still reclaim privacy. Both Facebook and Gmail have options to disable monitoring by other applications. It might be worthwhile to pay the permissions page a visit. Routine password changes, as well as keying them in every time (rather than saving them on the system) might be worth the trouble. That said, nothing works like caution.

An Attacking Refrigerator!
A year ago, Proofpoint, a US-based security solutions provider, noticed an unusual type of cyber attack. Emails were sent in batches of about a lakh, thrice a day, aimed at slowing down large enterprises. What was unique about this attack was that upto 25 per cent of the volume was sent by devices other than computers, laptops, mobile phones or such devices. Instead, the emails came from everyday consumer electronic items like network routers, televisions, and at least one refrigerator, according to the company, with not more than 10 emails from any one device, making the attack difficult to block. This is now known as the first Internet of Things or IoT-based attack, where connected everyday-use devices are hacked into and used as cyber weaponry.

With the IoT, you have devices talking to one another, opening up multiple places to be breached, says MobME’s Gopal. From your shoe to T-shirt, everything becomes a potential bot. India should be concerned. Research by securities provider Symantec says India tops the list of countries wherein Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks originate. DDoS attacks are those where hundreds of bots target a website (say, an e-commerce company) on its big discount day, thereby slowing down traffic to the site. The report says a bot’s services can be bought for as low as Rs 300 to bring down a site for a few minutes. Monthly subscription plans are available for lengthier attacks.

Corporates can never be too careful, feels Shrivastava who, as part of his investigations, comes across several instances where companies are hacked into because of lack of best practices. How many companies have blocked pen drives on office machinery, he asks. In a tiny device, a humungous amount of data can be stolen. Till the first incident happens, nobody realises the importance of security, he says. For example, at EY, the IT security does not permit copying of the text of emails by the recipient. Recent reports suggest that the JP Morgan security breach was the result of neglect of one of its servers in terms of a security upgrade.

According to a study by Microsoft, the estimated loss to enterprises from lost data in 2014 was $491 billion.

You Against The Mafia
The fight really is about who’s weaker, says Altaf Halde, managing director, Kaspersky Lab-South Asia. “The problem here is the consumer.” Nothing excuses us from not protecting ourselves. That includes getting an anti-virus installed, but most people often disable it when it flags a particular activity that we want to pursue online.

Halde also brings up the BYOD (bring your own device) culture that is taking root. Asking employees to bring their own devices could help cut costs for a company, but that also brings in their inadequate protection, which could potentially translate into a much higher cost to the company, he says.

On the other side of the ring is the virtual underground mafia that profits from all types of data that get compromised — details of one’s sexual preferences, favourite restaurants or credit card details. Modi says in underground circles, the going rate for a stolen credit card number is $2.2 for a Visa, $2.5 for a MasterCard and $3 for an AmEx number. Transactions are made through crypto-currencies such as bitcoins, making them virtually untraceable.

As Modi says, the ideal scenario would be for all of us to throw away our smartphones and live an entirely offline existence. “But since that isn’t feasible, let’s embrace the risk, but with adequate measures to ensure that we are not affected.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/business-world-9-2-2015-abraham-c-mathews-www-the-hackers-haven

WSIS+10 High-Level Event: Open Consultation Process

praskrishna — 2014-06-04T10:14:01Z

Jyoti Panday represented the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) at the WSIS+10 High-Level Event:Open Consultation Process held in Geneva from May 28 to 31, 2014.

The Fifth Physical Meeting marked Phase Six of the Open Consultation Process for the WSIS+10 High-Level Event (HLE) to be held in Geneva from June 10 to 13, 2014.

The meeting saw the culmination of the multistakeholder review process on the WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of the WSIS Outcomes and the WSIS+10 Vision for WSIS Beyond 2015.

CIS made interventions on text related to increasing women's participation, freedom of expression, media rights, data privacy, network security and human rights.

CIS also endorsed text on action line 'Media' which reaffirmed committment to freedom of expression, data privacy and media rights offline and online including protection of sources, publishers and journalists.

Download the final agreed draft of the WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes that will be deliberated upon and agreed at the HLE, for your reference.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/wsis-high-level-event-open-consultation-process

WSIS+10 High Level Event: A Bird's Eye Report

geetha — 2014-06-20T15:57:32Z

The WSIS+10 High Level was organised by the ITU and collaborative UN entities on June 9-13, 2014. It aimed to evaluate the progress on implementation of WSIS Outcomes from Geneva 2003 and Tunis 2005, and to envision a post-2015 Development Agenda. Geetha Hariharan attended the event on CIS' behalf.

The World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) +10 High Level Event (HLE) was hosted at the ITU Headquarters in Geneva, from June 9-13, 2014. The HLE aimed to review the implementation and progress made on information and communication technology (ICT) across the globe, in light of WSIS outcomes (Geneva 2003 and Tunis 2005). Organised in three parallel tracks, the HLE sought to take stock of progress in ICTs in the last decade (High Level track), initiate High Level Dialogues to formulate the post-2015 development agenda, as well as host thematic workshops for participants (Forum track).

The High Level Track:

Opening Ceremony, WSIS+10 High Level Event (Source)

The High Level track opened officially on June 10, 2014, and culminated with the endorsement by acclamation (as is ITU tradition) of two Outcome Documents. These were: (1) WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes, taking stock of ICT developments since the WSIS summits, (2) WSIS+10 Vision for WSIS Beyond 2015, aiming to develop a vision for the post-2015 global information society. These documents were the result of the WSIS+10 Multi-stakeholder Preparatory Platform (MPP), which involved WSIS stakeholders (governments, private sector, civil society, international organizations and relevant regional organizations).

The MPP met in six phases, convened as an open, inclusive consultation among WSIS stakeholders. It was not without its misadventures. While ITU Secretary General Dr. Hamadoun I. Touré consistently lauded the multi-stakeholder process, and Ambassador Janis Karklins urged all parties, especially governments, to “let the UN General Assembly know that the multi-stakeholder model works for Internet governance at all levels”, participants in the process shared stories of discomfort, disagreement and discord amongst stakeholders on various IG issues, not least human rights on the Internet, surveillance and privacy, and multi-stakeholderism. Richard Hill of the Association for Proper Internet Governance (APIG) and the Just Net Coalition writes that like NETmundial, the MPP was rich in a diversity of views and knowledge exchange, but stakeholders failed to reach consensus on crucial issues. Indeed, Prof. Vlamidir Minkin, Chairman of the MPP, expressed his dismay at the lack of consensus over action line C9. A compromise was agreed upon in relation to C9 later.

Some members of civil society expressed their satisfaction with the extensive references to human rights and rights-centred development in the Outcome Documents. While governmental opposition was seen as frustrating, they felt that the MPP had sought and achieved a common understanding, a sentiment echoed by the ITU Secretary General. Indeed, even Iran, a state that had expressed major reservations during the MPP and felt itself unable to agree with the text, agreed that the MPP had worked hard to draft a document beneficial to all.

Concerns around the MPP did not affect the review of ICT developments over the last decade. High Level Panels with Ministers of ICT from states such as Uganda, Bangladesh, Sweden, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and others, heads of the UN Development Programme, UNCTAD, Food and Agriculture Organisation, UN-WOMEN and others spoke at length of rapid advances in ICTs. The focus was largely on ICT access and affordability in developing states. John E. Davies of Intel repeatedly drew attention to innovative uses of ICTs in Africa and Asia, which have helped bridge divides of affordability, gender, education and capacity-building. Public-private partnerships were the best solution, he said, to affordability and access. At a ceremony evaluating implementation of WSIS action-lines, the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC), India, won an award for its e-health application MOTHER.

The Outcome Documents themselves shall be analysed in a separate post. But in sum, the dialogue around Internet governance at the HLE centred around the success of the MPP. Most participants on panels and in the audience felt this was a crucial achievement within the realm of the UN, where the Tunis Summit had delineated strict roles for stakeholders in paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda. Indeed, there was palpable relief in Conference Room 1 at the CICG, Geneva, when on June 11, Dr. Touré announced that the Outcome Documents would be adopted without a vote, in keeping with ITU tradition, even if consensus was achieved by compromise.

The High Level Dialogues:

Prof. Vladimir Minkin delivers a statement. (Source)

The High Level Dialogues on developing a post-2015 Development Agenda, based on WSIS action lines, were active on June 12. Introducing the Dialogue, Dr. Touré lamented the Millennium Development Goals as a “lost opportunity”, emphasizing the need to alert the UN General Assembly and its committees as to the importance of ICTs for development.

As on previous panels, there was intense focus on access, affordability and reach in developing countries, with Rwanda and Bangladesh expounding upon their successes in implementing ICT innovations domestically. The world is more connected than it was in 2005, and the ITU in 2014 is no longer what it was in 2003, said speakers. But we lack data on ICT deployment across the globe, said Minister Knutssen of Sweden, recalling the gathering to the need to engage all stakeholders in this task. Speakers on multiple panels, including the Rwandan Minister for CIT, Marilyn Cade of ICANN and Petra Lantz of the UNDP, emphasized the need for ‘smart engagement’ and capacity-building for ICT development and deployment.

A crucial session on cybersecurity saw Dr. Touré envision a global peace treaty accommodating multiple stakeholders. On the panel were Minister Omobola Johnson of Nigeria, Prof. Udo Helmbrecht of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA), Prof. A.A. Wahab of Cybersecurity Malaysia and Simon Muller of Facebook. The focus was primarily on building laws and regulations for secure communication and business, while child protection was equally considered.

The lack of laws/regulations for cybersecurity (child pornography and jurisdictional issues, for instance), or other legal protections (privacy, data protection, freedom of speech) in rapidly connecting developing states was noted. But the question of cross-border surveillance and wanton violations of privacy went unaddressed except for the customary, unavoidable mention. This was expected. Debates in Internet governance have, in the past year, been silently and invisibly driven by the Snowden revelations. So too, at WSIS+10 Cybersecurity, speakers emphasized open data, information exchange, data ownership and control (the right to be forgotten), but did not openly address surveillance. Indeed, Simon Muller of Facebook called upon governments to publish their own transparency reports: A laudable suggestion, even accounting for Facebook’s own undetailed and truncated reports.

In a nutshell, the post-2015 Development Agenda dialogues repeatedly emphasized the importance of ICTs in global connectivity, and their impact on GDP growth and socio-cultural change and progress. The focus was on taking this message to the UN General Assembly, engaging all stakeholders and creating an achievable set of action lines post-2015.

The Forum Track:

Participants at the UNESCO session on its Comprehensive Study on Internet-related Issues (Source)

The HLE was organized as an extended version of the WSIS Forum, which hosts thematic workshops and networking opportunities, much like any other conference. Running in parallel sessions over 5 days, the WSIS Forum hosted sessions by the ITU, UNESCO, UNDP, ICANN, ISOC, APIG, etc., on issues as diverse as the WSIS Action Lines, the future of Internet governance, the successes and failures of WCIT-2012, UNESCO’s Comprehensive Study on Internet-related Issues, spam and a taxonomy of Internet governance.

Detailed explanation of each session I attended is beyond the scope of this report, so I will limit myself to the interesting issues raised.

At ICANN’s session on its own future (June 9), Ms. Marilyn Cade emphasized the importance of national and regional IGFs for both issue-awareness and capacity-building. Mr. Nigel Hickson spoke of engagement at multiple Internet governance fora: “Internet governance is not shaped by individual events”. In light of criticism of ICANN’s apparent monopoly over IANA stewardship transition, this has been ICANN’s continual response (often repeated at the HLE itself). Also widely discussed was the role of stakeholders in Internet governance, given the delineation of roles and responsibilities in the Tunis Agenda, and governments’ preference for policy-monopoly (At WSIS+10, Indian Ambassador Dilip Sinha seemed wistful that multilateralism is a “distant dream”).

This discussion bore greater fruit in a session on Internet governance ‘taxonomy’. The session saw Mr. George Sadowsky, Dr. Jovan Kurbalija, Mr. William Drake and Mr. Eliot Lear (there is surprisingly no official profile-page on Mr. Lear) expound on dense structures of Internet governance, involving multiple methods of classification of Internet infrastructure, CIRs, public policy issues, etc. across a spectrum of ‘baskets’ – socio-cultural, economic, legal, technical. Such studies, though each attempting clarity in Internet governance studies, indicate that the closer you get to IG, the more diverse and interconnected the eco-system gets. David Souter’s diagrams almost capture the flux of dynamic debate in this area (please see pages 9 and 22 of this ISOC study).

There were, for most part, insightful interventions from session participants. Mr. Sadowsky questioned the effectiveness of the Tunis Agenda delineation of stakeholder-roles, while Mr. Lear pleaded that techies be let to do their jobs without interference. Ms. Anja Kovacs raised pertinent concerns about including voiceless minorities in a ‘rough consensus’ model. Across sessions, questions of mass surveillance, privacy and data ownership rose from participants. The protection of human rights on the Internet – especially freedom of expression and privacy – made continual appearance, across issues like spam (Question 22-1/1 of ITU-D Study Group 1) and cybersecurity.

Conclusion:

The HLE was widely attended by participants across WSIS stakeholder-groups. At the event, a great many relevant questions such as the future of ICTs, inclusions in the post-2015 Development Agenda, the value of muti-stakeholder models, and human rights such as free speech and privacy were raised across the board. Not only were these raised, but cognizance was taken of them by Ministers, members of the ITU and other collaborative UN bodies, private sector entities such as ICANN, technical community such as the ISOC and IETF, as well as (obviously) civil society.

Substantively, the HLE did not address mass surveillance and privacy, nor of expanding roles of WSIS stakeholders and beyond. Processually, the MPP failed to reach consensus on several issues comfortably, and a compromise had to be brokered.

But perhaps a big change at the HLE was the positive attitude to multi-stakeholder models from many quarters, not least the ITU Secretary General Dr. Hamadoun Touré. His repeated calls for acceptance of multi-stakeholderism left many members of civil society surprised and tentatively pleased. Going forward, it will be interesting to track the ITU and the rest of UN’s (and of course, member states’) stances on multi-stakeholderism at the ITU Plenipot, the WSIS+10 Review and the UN General Assembly session, at the least.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/wsis-10-high-level-event-a-birds-eye-report

Would it be a unique identity crisis ?

praskrishna — 2011-04-01T17:10:30Z

The UID project will centralise a humongous amount of data but the fear is that it might fall into the wrong hands.

The Unique Identification (UID) project is already up and running. It’s touted as a watershed in inclusive politics, of bringing people, who by virtue of physical remoteness, their station in society or other liabilities were excluded from the system, back into it. UID Chairman Nandan Nilekani recently said that the aadhaar number will not replace the passport, driving license or the voter identity card and that by 2014, 60 per cent of the country’s population will have the 12-digit UID number. The idea, though it has not been made explicit, is that Aadhaar will eventually become the key document for the common man to navigate the system, whether it is opening a bank account or making a rent agreement to booking a train ticket or applying for a job.

In fact, there is the implicit danger that sooner than later the original idea of inclusiveness could be turned on its head by denying benefits to people who don’t have the Aadhaar! “There is nothing to ensure that you will continue to receive the same benefits like those who have the UID number. The claim that it is not mandatory is legally correct. But in practice it would not be,” said Prof Sridhar Krishnaswamy of W B University for Juridical Sciences.

It is a fundamental premise that data subjects ought to have “inalienable moral rights” about the “integrity” of the data collected about them. But even as UID is one of the best things that could have happened to deepen the democratic process in our society, the often un-remarked fact is that the project has also become the biggest industrial collector of personal information. Considering the size and heterogeneity of the Indian population, it becomes as big as Google, and the implications of this are quite frightening. The UID draft bill, which has to be cleared by Parliament for it to become law, has only perfunctorily looked at the dangers posed by such huge and centralized collection of data. It glosses over the issue, content with making conservative noises about “the interlinking of databases”. This only shows how casual our policy makers, even the most enlightened of them, are towards the whole issue of safeguarding privacy.

The Bangalore-based Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) has analyzed the draft UID bill in considerable depth. They have identified three main areas where the bill needs to be drastically reworked: (i) plugging all loopholes which would enable corporate organizations from accessing information from the Aadhar database for their own commercial or R & D purposes; (ii) stipulating a maximum period for the data to be stored; (iii) to be transparent about the methods it uses to collect, store and disseminate data.

Prof Krishnaswamy agreed that the UID bill has not taken the corporate threat seriously enough. He contends that the UID authorities should take small, concrete steps that would act as effective safeguards. “In the mobile phone segment, user information is stored only for six months. Now, the government is proposing a similar time cap for ISP too. But when it comes to UID there is no such time limit. It means personal information could be held perpetually,” he explained. All that UID Assistant Director A K Pandey had to say to this was, “if that is it, then we have to live with it.”

Another worrying aspect of the proposed bill, according to Usha Ramanathan, an activist and expert on identity and digital issues, is its failure to fix accountability on the main players including enrollers, outsourcing companies, and the UDAI authority itself. “The data collector and data controller should be equally held responsible for the protection of data,” she said. However, UID authorities themselves are of the view that the apprehensions are being overplayed. Pandey maintained that there was nothing in the UID that would compromise the privacy of individuals. “You go to a bank or the LIC office and you give whatever information they ask you. But when it comes to UID alone you say the information you give could be dangerous. We don’t quite understand this,” he retorted. He played down the fears that in the central data storage vital information could go corrupt. “We have taken adequate measures to protect it. We will have a backup,” he said.

The issue of transparency of data collection and storage remains. The CIS analysts feel that the UID should put out a synopsis of the algorithms it will use in collating and protecting data so that the public at large can be reassured of the firewalls that are in place. Then there is also the issue of not having concrete provisions in the UID bill to deal with special cases like whistleblowers and victims of abuse whose identities need to be protected even more carefully.

The UID authority also bypasses the question of whether it is confusing data protection with the larger issue of protection of privacy. A person’s identity is more than her date of birth, surname, religion, fingerprint or even the sum of these. Such information is basically data and allows governments or corporate bodies to provide a person a nominal identity, one that is indispensable if she is to be part of a socio-political system. The state and corporate entities conveniently deny a person her self, thereby reducing her to a subject instead of seeing each individual as a thinking, acting agency.

Be that as it may, right now the concern of civil society is to make at least protection of data as foolproof as possible. Aadhaar is just one of the projects that pose a threat to the privacy of individual citizens. There is the broader problem of how the Internet and mobile phones, the popularity of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, and the widespread use of credit and debit cards has led to blatant misuse of personal information gathered online, sharing of consumer data without consent and the state’s own Big Brother surveillance. The need for an effective privacy law in India is imperative.

Read the original in Bangalore Mirror

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/unique-identity-crisis

Worries voiced over ID project

radha — 2011-04-02T12:33:50Z

An article in The Hindu - 17th April

The Government of India's Unique Identification (UID) Project came under flak at a workshop organised jointly by the Citizen Action Forum (CAF), the People's Union of Civil Liberties - Karnataka, the Alternative Law Forum and the Centre for Internet and Society.

At the workshop "UID Project: A Debate on Fundamental Rights", held on Friday, members from civil socities expressed their apprehension over the project. Dissenters said the potential dangers to privacy and other civil liberties need to be discussed also.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/worries-voiced-over-id-project

Worldwide: International Privacy - 2013 Year in Review - Asia

praskrishna — 2014-01-31T08:44:20Z

Asian Data Privacy Updates

The article by Gonzalo S. Zeballos, James A. Sherer and Alan M. Pate was published in Mondaq's yearly review on January 8, 2014.

China

China's Personal Information Protection Law Proposal was submitted to the State Council in 2008, which was followed by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology's non-binding Internet Information Services Market Order Provisions of 2011. However, little direct progress was made until the standing committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) introduced its Decision on Strengthening Internet Information Protection (the Decision) on December 28, 2012. Echoing Directive 95/46/EC in the EU by stipulating that the collection and use of information will be "legitimate, proper, and necessary," the Decision seeks to protect network information security; the lawful interest of citizens, legal persons, and other organizations; and safeguard China's security and social order through its Articles.

he Decision's first Article states that "[n]o organization or individual may steal or obtain in other illegal manners [ ] citizens' individual electronic information, sell or illegally provide citizens' individual electronic information to other persons." Instruction to Internet Service Providers (ISPs) continues, where providers must, among other activities:

Clearly indicate the purposes, methods, and scope of collection and use of citizens' data;
Obtain agreement from citizens before collecting their data;
Publicize rules for the collection and use of personal data;
Preserve the secrecy of collected data;
Not divulge, distort, or damage the data;
Refrain from selling or otherwise illegally providing the data to others; and
Adopt technical measures and other methods to ensure information security and prevent damage to or loss of the data.

Among the provisions of the Decision is Article Six, specifically directed at network service providers, whereby users of the services must "provide real identity information" prior to "website access," "fixed telephone, mobile telephone," "other surfing formalities," or "information publication services." In response to criticism that Article Six would be used to discourage whistleblowers and other Chinese dissention, the government-sponsored Xinhua News Agency argued that the Decision "will help, rather than harm, the country's netizens."

Japan

On May 24, 2013, the LDP-led ruling coalition directed the passage of the "Common Number" Bill through both Diet chambers. The Common Number Bill plans to assign every Japanese resident, including mid-to-long-stay foreigners and special permanent residents, a personal identification number beginning in January 2016. Additionally, a portal site through which people can check their social security records and other information via the Internet is planned for 2017. The numbering system was originally proposed in 2009, but remained quiescent until the LDP-New Komeito ruling coalition mustered sufficient support based, in part, on a philosophical foundation for fair social welfare and tax systems.

To oversee some aspects of the ID system, a third-party independent committee with independent authority will oversee allegations of data mishandling by public officials. Those who leak or illegally commercialize ID information will face up to four years in prison or a ¥2 million fine. While the use of a single number system has raised some concerns, including the potential for "forcible data-matching," the government push for support has focused on efficiencies in administration and easier detection of tax evasion and welfare fraud.

Malaysia

On November 15, 2013, the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) of 2010 was entered into force, introducing an omnibus privacy regime in Malaysia for the first time. This new regulation carries a host of requirements, including registration with the Personal Data Protection Department of Malaysia (PDPD) for a number of industries, including (among others) banking and financial institutions. The PDPA also includes the threat of severe consequences for non-compliance, including "fines for companies and/or fines and imprisonment for directors and officers of the company."

Khazaksthan

On November 26, 2013, Kazakhstani Law No. 94-V on Personal Data and its Protection came into force, defining such concepts as "personal data" among others, but left some ambiguity in how data might be transferred and/or stored internationally. It also contained a number of limitations: Law No. 94-V does not extend to the collection of personal data for personal and family needs; the use of information for the Kazakhstani National Archive; the collection, processing, and protection of personal data related to Kazakhstani state secrets; or the use of information related to intelligence, counter-intelligence, and criminal activities, within legal limits.

South Korea

Article 16 of South Korea's Personal Information Protection Act (effective September 30, 2011) was amended on August 6, 2013 to incorporate an affirmative obligation on the part of a personal information processor, requiring notification to data subjects that data subjects may deny consent for the collection of any personal information other than for any purposes under Article 15(1). This continues South Korea's stringent efforts to promote data privacy, and provides another instance of South Korea's articulation of a minimum data collection regime.

Singapore

Singapore's Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), passed in 2012, went into effect on January 2, 2013, the same day Singapore's Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) was established; some portion of PDPA does not come into full effect until July 2, 2014. The PDPC followed-up the implementation of the PDPA with a further guidance note on September 24, 2013 which, among other topics, gave direction to organizations regarding notification requirements for the collection, use, or disclosure of personal data as well as the anonymization of personal data. This guidance outlined the use of 'cookies' for internet user's online activity, distinguishing in part between active consent on one hand, and "the mere failure of an individual to actively manage his browser settings" on the other.

Hong Kong

Revisions to Hong Kong's Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance – Code of Practice on Consumer Credit Data – took effect on April 1, 2013. These revisions require consent prior to the use of personal data in the context of targeted, direct advertising, and instruct individuals that, while direct marketers must notify individuals of their opt-out right prior to using personal data for the first time, individuals may choose to opt out at any time at no cost to the individual opting out. The Ordinance also provides for the following penalties: if "the transfer of personal data to third parties [is] for gain, the maximum penalty is a fine of HK$1,000,000 and imprisonment for 5 years. For other direct marketing contraventions, the maximum penalty is a fine of HK$500,000 and imprisonment for 3 years."

India

While India currently adheres to the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011 (Rules) enacted in 2011, the Centre for Internet and Society presented a new Privacy (Protection) Bill, 2013 (Bill), on September 30, 2013. The Bill seeks to further refine provisions of the Rules, with a focus on protection of personal data through limitations on use and requirements for notice. The collection of personal data would be prohibited unless "necessary for the achievement of a purpose of the person seeking its collection," and, subject to sections 6 and 7 of the Bill, "no personal data may be collected under this Act prior to the data subject being given notice, in such form and manner as may be prescribed, of the collection." The Bill acknowledges the collection of data with and without consent; the regulation of personal data storage, processing, transfer, and security; and discusses the different types of disclosure.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/mondaq-january-8-2014-gonzalo-s-zeballos-james-a-sherer-alan-m-pate-worldwide-international-privacy-2013-year-in-review-asia

World Wide Rule

nishant — 2013-07-01T10:26:24Z

Nishant Shah's review of Schmidt and Cohen's book was published in the Indian Express on June 14, 2013.

Click to read the original published in the Indian Express here

Book: The New Digital Age
Author: Eric Schmidt & Jared Cohen
Publisher: Hachette
Price: Rs 650
Pages: 315

When I first heard that Eric Schmidt the chairman of Google and Jared Cohen, the director of the techno-political think-tank Google Ideas, are co-authoring a book about our future and how it is going to be re-shaped with the emergence of digital technologies, I must confess I was sceptical. When people who do things that you like start writing about those things, it is not always a pretty picture. Or an easy read. However, like all sceptics, I am only a romantic waiting to be validated. So, when I picked up The New Digital Age I was hoping to be entertained, informed and shaken out of my socks as the gurus of the interwebz spin science fiction futures for our times. Sadly, I have been taught my lesson and have slid back into hardened scepticism.

Here is the short version of the book: Technology is good. Technology is going to be exciting. There are loads of people who haven't had it yet. There are not enough people who have figured out how things work. Everybody needs to go online because no matter what, technologies are here to stay and they are going to be the biggest corpus of power. They write, "There is a canyon dividing people who understand technology and people charged with addressing the world's toughest geopolitical issues, and no one has built a bridge…As global connectivity continues its unprecedented advance, many old institutions and hierarchies will have to adapt or risk becoming obsolete, irrelevant to modern society." So the handful who hold the reigns of the digital (states, corporates, artificial intelligence clusters) are either going to rule the world, or, well, write books about it.

The long version is slightly more nuanced, even though it fails to give us what we have grown to expect of all things Google — the bleeding edge of back and beyond. For a lay person, observations that Schmidt and Cohen make about the future of the digital age might be mildly interesting in the way title credits to your favourite movie can be. Once they have convinced us, many, many times, that the internet is fast and fluid and that it makes things fast and fluid and hence the future we imagine is going to be fast and fluid, the authors tell us that the internet is spawning a new "caste system" of haves, have-nots, and wants-but-does-not-haves.

Citing the internet as "the largest experiment involving anarchy in history" they look at the new negotiations of power around the digital. Virulent viruses from the "Middle East" make their appearance. Predictably wars of censorship and free information in China get due attention. Telcos get a big hand for building the infrastructure which can sell Google phones to people in Somalia. The book offers a straightforward (read military) reading of drones and less-than-expected biased views on cyberterrorism, which at least escapes the jingoism that the USA has been passing off in the service of a surveillance state. And more than anything else, the book shows politicos and governments around the world, that the future is messy, anarchy is at hand, but as long as they put their trust in Big Internet Brothers, the world will be a manageable place.

So while you can clearly see where my review for the book is heading, I must give it its due credit.

There are three things about this book that make it interesting. The first is how Schmidt and Cohen seem to be in a seesaw dialogue with themselves. They realise that five billion people are going to get connected online. They gush a little about what this net-universality is going to mean. And then immediately, they also realise that we have to prepare ourselves for a "Brave New World," which is going to be infinitely more messy and scary. They recognise that the days of anonymity on the Web are gone, with real life identities becoming our primary digital avatars. However, they also hint at a potential future of pseudonymity that propels free speech in countries with authoritarian regimes. This oscillation between the good, the bad, the plain and the incredible, keeps their writing grounded without erring too much either on the side of techno-euphoria or dystopic visions of the future.

Second, and perhaps justly so, the book doles out a lot of useful information not just for the techno-neophytes but also the amateur savant. There are stories about "Currygate" in Singapore, or of what Vodaphone did in Egypt after the Arab Spring, or of the "Human Flesh Search Engine" in China, which offer a comprehensive, if not critical, view of the way things are. Schmidt and Cohen have been everywhere on the ether and they have cyberjockeyed for decades to tell us stories that might be familiar but are still worth the effort of writing.

Third, it is a readable book. It doesn't require you to Telnet your way into obscure meaning sets in the history of computing. It is written for people who are still mystified not only about the past of the Net but also its future, and treads a surprisingly balanced ground in both directions. It is a book you can give to your grandmother, and she might be inspired to get herself a Facebook (or maybe a Google +) account.

But all said and done, I expected more. It is almost as if Schmidt and Cohen are sitting on a minefield of ideas which they want to hint at but don't yet want to share because they might be able to turn it into a new app for the Nexus instead. It is a book that could have been. It wasn't. It is ironic how silent the book is about the role that big corporations play in shaping our techno-futures, and the fact that it is printed on dead-tree books with closed licensing so I couldn't get a free copy online. For people claiming to build new and political futures, the fact that this wisdom could not come out in more accessible forms and formats, speaks a lot about how seriously we can take their views of the future.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/indian-express-june-14-2013-nishant-shah-world-wide-rule

WORLD WIDE PLAYGROUND

praskrishna — 2013-06-05T09:47:33Z

The Delhi High Court recently asked the central government to explain why minors are allowed to create online accounts on social networking sites such as Facebook or Orkut. The High Court’s question stems from a petition filed by former senior BJP leader K.N. Govindacharya last year.

The Op-ed was published in the Telegraph on May 15, 2013. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

Govindacharya argued that by allowing minors to open accounts on social media sites, the companies of these sites were violating the Indian Majority Act, 1875, the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and the Information Technology Act, 2000.

One of Govindacharya’s main concerns is that when minors give false information to open an account on an online portal, they are liable to be held guilty for a criminal offence.

“Providing false information about oneself is more of a crime than a civil wrong,” explains Debsankar Chowdhury, a Calcutta-based cyber law expert. “However, if it is provided with an intention to enter into a contract which otherwise is not allowed, it is tantamount to fraud under Section 17 of the Contract Act of 1872.”

For minors, though, Chowdhury points out that the Juvenile Justice Act, 2005, will be brought into play, and they will face lighter sentences.

As for the social networking companies themselves, according to the law of the land they can be held accountable if a user provides them with false information. As Pavan Duggal, a Supreme Court advocate and expert on cyber law, points out, “All social networking sites are intermediaries under Section 2(1)(w) of the amended Information Technology Act, 2000. They are made responsible for all third party data or information made available by them under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.” As such, social networking sites would be held accountable for allowing people, especially minors, to create fake profiles on their networks under Section 79 and 85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, he adds.

The other problem here is that while a social networking site like Facebook allows anyone over 13 to open an account, according to Indian law, anyone under 18 years of age is a minor; and a minor cannot enter into a contract with any entity. “The issue raised in Govindacharya’s petition is of a fundamental nature,” opines Duggal. “Section 3 of the Indian Majority Act, 1875, clearly states that every person domiciled in India shall attain the age of majority on his completing the age of 18 years. However, Facebook allows 13-year-olds to become its members. Since children lack the inherent capacity to contract under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the contract entered into between Indian children below the age of 18 years and Facebook is null and void.”

But though the nitty gritty of the law seems to be weighted against children below 18 — or even 13 — joining social networking sites, not everyone believes that kids should be prevented from having a presence online. Six months ago, 10-year-old Shruti (name changed) met with an accident, and was bedridden for some time. She was bored and miserable. To cheer her up, her father signed her on to Facebook — yes, by providing false information about her age.

Other parents may not take a similar view of their young children joining Facebook under false pretexts. But Ashok Agarwal, a Delhi-based lawyer and child rights activist, believes that Govindacharya’s petition demonstrates an outdated way of thinking. “We are letting children speak at the UN and in Parliament, but we don’t want to let them speak online,” he says. “Allowing children to use sites like Facebook doesn’t hurt them, and if anything, denying them access to it would be denying them their universal Right to Participate. This right is part of Unicef’s Convention on the Rights of the Child.” And also it’s denying them access to a tool and medium that is, and will be, an integral part of their lives, adds Agarwal.

Leaving aside the debate on whether or not children below a certain age should be allowed on social networking sites, Chowdhury points out that right now there is no means of checking the age of those who are signing in to these online portals.

In fact, Section D of Govindacharya’s petition does point out the need for some kind of verification process when people create an online account, much like what phone service providers do when someone applies for a new connection.

But experts point out that this is not feasible in the case of social networking sites. Says Chowdhury, “Mobile companies operate their network in specific locations, whereas sites like Facebook exist worldwide. Moreover, these portals don’t take a single penny from their users. So do you really think it is possible to make offline verification?”

Indeed, verification of user data — ostensibly to cut out underage persons from logging on to social networking sites — has much wider ramifications. Pranesh Prakash, policy director at the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore, points out that it could start a downward spiral towards loss of online privacy. “If anyone wants to create an account on a website, but has to provide some sort of verifiable data, you’re going to remove a person’s ability to post anonymously on the Internet. Then what happens to freedom of speech? People like to post online anonymously, but if everyone’s identity is known, that privacy is revoked.”

The effect of social networking sites on children will be debated for a long time. But clearly, it would be tough to enforce laws to prevent children from logging on to these sites.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-telegraph-op-ed-may-15-2013-world-wide-playground