We are anonymous, we are legion

Farming the Future: Deployment of Artificial Intelligence in the agricultural sector in India

Elonnai Hickok, Arindrajit Basu, Siddharth Sonkar and Pranav M B — 2019-10-16T13:41:02Z

This case study was published as a chapter in the joint UNESCAP-Google publication titled Artificial Intelligence in Public Service Delivery. The chapter in its final form would not have been possible without the efforts and very useful interventions by our colleagues at Digital Asia Hub,Google, and UNESCAP.

Although agriculture is a critical sector for India’s economic development, it continues to face many challenges including a lack of modernization of agricultural methods, fragmented landholdings, erratic rainfalls, overuse of groundwater and a lack of access to information on weather, markets and pricing. As state governments create policies and frameworks to mitigate these challenges, the role of technology has often come up as a potential driver of positive change.

Farmers in the southern Indian states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh are facing significant challenges. For hundreds of years,these farmers have relied on traditional agricultural methods to make sowing and harvesting decisions, but now volatile weather patterns and shifting monsoon seasons are making such ancient wisdom obsolete. Farmers are unable to predict weather patterns or crop yields accurately, making it difficult for them to make informed financial and operational decisions associated with planting and harvesting. Erratic weather patterns particularly affect those farmers who reside in remote areas, cut off from meaningful accessto infrastructure and information. In addition to a lack of vital weather information, farmers may lack information about market conditions and may then sell their crops to intermediaries at below-market prices.

Against this backdrop, the state governments and local partners in southern India teamed up with Microsoft to develop predictive AI services to help smallholder farmers to improve their crop yields and give them greater price control. Since 2016 three applications have been developed and applied for use in these communities, two of which are discussed in this case study: the AI-sowing app and the price forecasting model.

Click to read the report here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/artificial-intelligence-in-the-delivery-of-public-services-elonnai-hickok-pranav-bidare-arindrajit-basu-siddharth-october-16-2019-farming-the-future

FAQ on the Aadhaar Project and the Bill

Elonnai Hickok, Vanya Rakesh, and Vipul Kharbanda — 2016-04-13T14:06:43Z

This FAQ attempts to address the key questions regarding the Aadhaar/UIDAI project and the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Bill, 2016 (henceforth, Bill). This is neither a comprehensive list of questions, nor does it contain fully developed answers. We will continue to add questions to this list, and edit/expand the answers, based on our ongoing research. We will be grateful to receive your comments, criticisms, evidences, edits, suggestions for new answers, and any other responses. These can either be shared as comments in the document hosted on Google Drive, or via tweets sent to the information policy team at @CIS_InfoPolicy.

To comment on and/or download the file, click here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/aadhaar-project-and-bill-faq

Faking it on WhatsApp: How India's favourite messaging app is turning into a rumour mill

praskrishna — 2017-05-19T14:44:05Z

Spreading fast and wild on WhatsApp fake news about riots, ‘miracle’ currency

The article by Samarth Bansal was published in the Hindustan Times on May 19, 2017. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

It didn’t take long after demonetisation for almost everyone to hear about the ‘special properties’ of the new Rs 2000 note, which was said to include a ‘built-in GPS-enabled nano-chip’. News of this high-tech feature spread rapidly, even though there was no notification about it from the Reserve Bank of India or any other government department. What there was, instead, was a popular WhatsApp message.

WhatsApp messages were involved in another fake-news controversy the very same month, when word of a salt shortage in North India spread widely. The fake news unleashed panic, and in Hyderabad, among other places, salt prices increased by a factor of four. It even extracted a victim, a woman died in Bakarganj Bazaar, Kanpur, when she slipped and fell into a drain in a panicked buying melee.

This isn’t the only time that fake news that circulated on WhatsApp led to violence. In 2013, messages sent on WhatsApp helped to incite riots in Muzaffarnagar. A two-year old video of a lynching in Pakistan was mischievously promoted as an attack on two Hindu boys by Muslims in Kawal village of Muzaffarnagar. The video, in turn, provoked calls for revenge. Though the police blocked the video on the internet, its spread could not be stopped on the app.

Facebook, WhatsApp’s parent company, has faced much flak for not curbing the circulation of fake news. On its part, Facebook has now said it will try to flag questionable news stories with the help of users and external fact checkers to cope with this problem.

But the instant messaging app poses similar challenges in a particularly intractable form. WhatsApp offers a particularly private medium of communication, something many people like about it. A case currently being heard at the Supreme Court of India concerns the protection of this very quality — while WhatsApp would like to allow Facebook to access its user data, a PIL contends that this move would be a violation of privacy.

The same factors of WhatsApp’s design that protect its users also make it difficult or impossible to study many aspects of communication on the platform. Even as anecdotal evidence piles up that WhatsApp is being used to distribute fake news, then, it remains hard to know just what is happening or what can be done in response.

Facebook vs WhatsApp

The differences between WhatsApp and Facebook dictate the ways people share news on each platform. “Facebook is a social platform where people express their concerns, react, and build perceptions based on an individual’s posts,” says Anoop Mishra, a digital marketing and social media consultant. “However, on WhatsApp, which is an end-to-end messaging platform, people share content in a more personal and closed way.”

It is because the primary mode of sharing on instant messaging apps is one-to-one, as opposed to the one-to-many relationship on Facebook, that the former feels more personal. This personal quality of most of the content shared directly or on small groups via WhatsApp carries with it the implicit endorsement of people you know. Given that the app is now a large and growing part of people’s lives on mobile devices, the way it influences news consumption demands more attention. “Lack of content moderation and privacy controls gives WhatsApp an edge over Facebook for sharing any type of multimedia content,” says Mishra.

For instance, to get your friends’ attention on Facebook, you need to tag them. Not every post by every friend shows up on your news feed; what you see is dictated by an algorithm. WhatsApp has a big advantage here since it works like a text message. You know that your message will be received by everyone you send it to.

A black hole for content

There is no non-anecdotal way to track the spread of content on WhatsApp. Facebook, for instance, is compatible with analytics tools capable of determining that a particular news report has been shared 7,000 times, say, or viewed 20,000 times.

Such analysis is not feasible with WhatsApp, which offers no way to mine social media data to understand the patterns, trends, or reach of any given message. Even its original source is completely opaque. What is true of particular texts also applies to the total sum of activity on WhatsApp: it is impossible to determine what kinds of messages the public is sharing most, what sorts of conditions people are sharing these messages in, or where in the world they are spreading.

Surpassing one billion

WhatsApp arrived in India at the beginning of the decade. At that time, chat apps were generally considered to be interchangeable with text messages. Today they’re widely understood to support sharing of all forms of multimedia content — photos, videos, audio files and even text documents.

Simplicity is one of WhatsApp’s signature virtues. All you need to do is download it: the programme automatically scans your phone book and links up with your contacts who are also users. Crucially, you don’t even need a password. According to Guide to Chat Apps, a report by the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University, the requirement of a password is “a significant barrier to entry for many people in emerging markets when it comes to other apps and social media platforms.”

In February 2016, WhatsApp crossed the one billion mark for active users worldwide. India is its largest market, with about 160 million active users.

WhatsApping the news

WhatsApp’s reach and growing role in the consumption of photos and videos has prompted media companies to take it seriously as a distribution channel. A report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism highlights the increasing adoption of new social networks among young people and the growing importance of recommendations as a gateway to news. “The digital generation expects the news to come to them,” says the report’s author journalist Nic Newman in a press release. “Young people rarely go directly to a mainstream news website anymore.”

But unlike apps like WeChat and Snapchat, which are gaining currency among millennials, WhatsApp hasn’t positioned itself as a media distribution platform. Media organisations have been experimenting nonetheless. For instance, the BBC ran pilots on WhatsApp and WeChat for the Indian elections in 2014. Users subscribed to the BBC news service on WhatsApp by adding a number to their contacts and sending a request message to join. They were then put on a broadcast list that sent them up to three updates a day in Hindi and English. Many media outlets, including ours, now have a WhatsApp sharing icon on their mobile websites.

For all its susceptibility to the dissemination of fake news, WhatsApp presents unique challenges to the mass sharing of content, just as it does for the mass tracking of it. It has no official application program interface (API), the service which allows programmers to build applications that automate the functions of a platform. “An official WhatsApp API release could spawn an entirely new industry of startups, in much the same way that the release of Twitter’s API did,” says the Tow Center report. “Except this time, it could be even bigger, given WhatsApp’s near-billion account user base.” Reaching out to a wider audience on WhatsApp — with either fake or authentic news — needs to be performed manually, via broadcast lists, which allow you to send the same message to many people at once, and groups.

State of control

Fake news might lead only to harmless speculation or minor inconvenience, as it did with rumours about the Rs 2000 note, or it could be dangerous, as was the case during the Muzaffarnagar riots. Pranesh Prakash, a policy director at the Centre for Internet and Society, a research and advocacy group focused on digital technology, believes that social media rumours gain potency after the imposition of censorship, under which people begin to wonder what the government is trying to conceal. “There is no way rumours can be completely quelled,” he says, “but the state can act against rumours through clear communication that calls out particular rumours, and tells people not to believe them.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/hindustan-times-samarth-bansal-faking-it-on-whatsapp-how-india-s-favourite-messaging-app-turned-into-a-rumour-mill

Faking a stand

praskrishna — 2015-09-27T12:41:51Z

A 'Like' here, a forward there, new-age India's patriotism is confined to social media

The article by Shweta T. Nanda was published in the Week on September 20, 2015. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

On the eve of Independence Day, Pune-based homemaker Archana Chaurasia, 36, was engaged in an animated conversation with friends when a WhatsApp message notification broke the rhythm of their chat. The content of the forwarded text pushed her into a deep thought for a few seconds. Brimming with pride, she forwarded it to five others on her contact list before returning to the chitchat.

The message read:
The property left behind by Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam:
He owned 6 pants (2 DRDO uniforms), 4 shirts (2 DRDO uniforms), 3 suits (1 western, 2 Indian), 2500 books, 1 flat (which he has donated), 1 Padmashri, 1 Padmabhushan, 1 Bharat Ratna, 16 doctorates, 1 website, 1 twitter account, 1 email id. He didn't have any TV, AC, car, jewellery, shares, land or bank balance.

He had even donated the last 8 years' pension towards the development of his village. He was a real patriot and true Indian... India will forever be grateful to you, sir… Is there any politician compared to him? Make sure all your friends and dear ones read this before 15th August.

“Such forwards evoke patriotism. While most of us aren’t able to do much for the nation, the least one can do is forward such interesting messages and share your love for the country,” explains Chaurasia.

Taken in by a sense of national pride, netizens are not thinking twice before forwarding messages. What we overlook though is how such innocent forwards are propelling a sense of false patriotism, especially among the youth. Often, the content of such messages is erroneous. For instance, DRDO doesn’t have a uniform!

Similarly, you might have thought that when the Empire State Building in New York was lit up in tricolour for Independence Day, it was a US government initiative. But in reality, some Indian Americans had raised money, booked it in advance and adorned it with saffron, white and green lights. The building can be booked in advance by anyone like a swish hall in a five-star hotel.

The messages could be provocative in the garb of ‘faux patriotism’—a recent video clip showing Indian Army firing at its Pakistani counterpart was, in fact, a footage of a three-year-old artillery exercise. Likewise, forwarded messages claiming Brahmos Missiles have been deployed on the Indo-Pak border and UNESCO has judged Jana Gana Mana as the world’s best national anthem were also incorrect.

“The desire to proclaim the greatness of your own political identity, which can often be linked to a religion, is a large part of what fuels the forwarding phenomenon, apart from the innate desire to share new-found knowledge,” says Pranesh Prakash, policy director at The Centre for Internet and Society, Bengaluru. That is why, forwarded messages that celebrate the achievements of historical figures and reassert that Indians have always been great go viral, he explains. “As you trust the person who is sending it, you don’t think about its accuracy. In fact, you don’t tend to question the authenticity of anything that reinforces a view that you already hold,” he says.

Faiz Ullah, assistant professor of media and cultural studies at Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, however, looks at it as the signal of a changing society, one that is witnessing the rise of a show-off culture, symbolism and individualism.

“The idea of patriotism is being trivialised,” he says. “It happens when you let the market decide your action. You are known for what you consume than what you give up. And the focus is more on forwarding patriotic messages or marketers announcing freedom sales than doing something substantial for the nation.”

E-forwards are a powerful tool in mobilising people, says Gaurav Singh, owner of Poltubaaz, an election management firm and political consultancy. The Delhi-based company also offers bulk e-texting services across social media and communication platforms.

While there is no study on the exact market size and open rate of such forwards across platforms, in case of emails, says Singh, out of 100 such messages, at least 30 are opened by users. Data analytics also allows one to zero in on the areas of interest of users and forward them relevant content accordingly.

“Some people create such messages just for fun, some do it to serve a commercial purpose, and some others aim to gain political mileage out of it,” says Singh. “For instance, supporters of political parties or those who swear by a certain kind of ideology create and circulate such messages to evoke a particular kind of mass sentiment.” Agrees Rakshit Tandon, a consultant with Internet and Mobile Association of India: “These networks play a key role in peddling strong ideologies.”

Congress spokesman Randeep Singh Surjewala says many such messages are the work of BJP supporters, who want to alter the country’s cultural landscape to reap long-term political dividends. “Their dirty tricks department is using vitriolic measures and false propaganda to influence people,” he says.

But Vinod Bansal, a spokesman of Vishva Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal, says these organisations don't believe in false propaganda but in doing national service. “Anyway, if such forwarded messages are factually correct and evoke patriotism, there is nothing wrong with them,” he says. For instance, if a video of terrorist Yakub Memon’s hanging is being popularised, you can’t call it Hinduisation; instead it is nationalism, he adds.

Another entrepreneur who owns a political campaign management firm that provided consultancy services to a national party in the 2014 general elections, however, reveals that party supporters, particularly of the youth wing, work round-the-clock to circulate e-forwards targeting a particular vote bank, aiming at both long-term and immediate political benefits. “We cater to such requests, and make sure that the content is not in-your-face but subtle yet effective.”

But is there a way to curb such erroneous e-forwards? Although it is possible to zero in on the point of origin of such messages on social media, it also means invading users’ privacy, says Rakesh Sharma, Supreme Court lawyer and founder of social networking platform Sabakuch.com. “Until someone objects to the content of the forwarded message [finding it defaming or explicit], we can’t do anything about it.”

Tandon, who is also an adviser to Uttar Pradesh Police’s cyber complaint redressal cell, says that unless cyber users learn “netiquettes” and take to “internet hygiene”, this menace will not stop. “Users have a responsibility, too,” he says. “Unless you know the authenticity of forwarded messages, don’t circulate them. Also, educate others.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/the-week-september-20-2015-shweta-t-nanda-faking-a-stand

Fake News, Rumors & Online Content Regulation

praskrishna — 2017-02-28T02:46:13Z

Medianama and Mint organized #NAMApolicy open house on 'Fake News, Rumors & Online Content Regulation' on February 22, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre. Japreet Grewal and Amber Sinha attended the event.

The discussions broadly covered the impact of Fake News on democratic processes, Legal status of online content regulation in India & administrative challenges with Fake News, Responsibility and accountability of online platforms, while addressing challenges of identification of sources of Fake News, Potential legal and non-legal ways of addressing Fake News, etc.

Agenda

06:30 to 07:00 pm - Registration
07:00 to 07:10 pm - Introductory note
07:10 to 09:00 pm - Round-table discussion moderated by Nikhil Pahwa
09:00 pm onwards - Networking dinner

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/fake-news-rumors-online-content-regulation

Fake Narendra Modi apps aplenty, but it’s up to users to protect themselves

praskrishna — 2016-12-10T04:24:24Z

The app, hosted on Google Play store, automatically gets excessive permission including full network access and ability to take pictures and videos once downloaded.

The article was published by Indian Express on December 2, 2016. Pranesh Prakash was quoted. Also see Nandini Yadav's blog post in BGR on December 3, 2016.

The app, hosted on Google Play store, automatically gets excessive permission including full network access and ability to take pictures and videos once downloaded.

A “Narendra Modi” app, purportedly offered by the Government of India, caught the attention of Internet expert Pranesh Prakash on Thursday as the app developer was found to be using a Bangladesh-based web host and e-mail address. Suggesting that this could be the work of a con-artist, Prakash underlined that granting access to fake apps could lead to security breach. The app, hosted on Google Play store, automatically gets excessive permission including full network access and ability to take pictures and videos once downloaded. The original NaMo, however, only gets access to read, modify and delete the user’s media files. The “fake” app was downloaded more than 1 lakh times and has an average rating of 4.4 from over 2,000 reviews. A simple search on the play store throws up dozens of Narendra Modi apps, some even calling themselves fake apps. The original app was published by Narendramodi.in and Government Of India. But there are scores of other apps trying to imitate the original.

Pranesh, who is Policy Director at The Centre for Internet and Society, also questioned how users can differentiate between fake and genuine apps when even the official app was registered using a gmail address. While the Government of India Narendra Modi app has been published using info@narendramodi.press, the one by Narendramodi.in has been published using a simple Gmail app. He also highlighted how the play store was flooded with fake banking apps, with one such “SBI app” gaining full access to the user’s files. Incidentally, the fake Modi Ki Note app which has been in the limelight since the demonetisation on high value notes and issue of new ones itself has many duplicates.

In the last two days, the Congress and its vice-president Rahul Gandhi fell victim to hacking as their verified Twitter accounts were compromised. Profane content was shared from both accounts, targeting the Gandhi and his family. This lead to the Congress questioning Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s digital India push as security remains a huge concern.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/indian-express-december-2-2016-fake-narendra-modi-apps-aplenty-but-it-is-up-to-users-to-protect-themselves

Fairness, Transparency and Accountable AI

Admin — 2018-05-20T14:26:59Z

Amber Sinha participated remotely in the inaugural meeting of Fairness, Transparency and Accountable AI working group of the Partnership on Artificial Intelligence on May 10, 2018. The meeting was held at DeepMind's office in London.

Agenda of the meeting here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/fairness-transparency-and-accountable-ai

Fair process frameworks for cross-border online spaces

praskrishna — 2013-10-21T09:02:02Z

This workshop is being organised by the Internet & Jurisdiction Project, Civil Society of France, Western Europe and Others Group and Internet & Jurisdiction Project, Civil Society of Germany, Western Europe and Others Group. Sunil Abraham is one of the panelists for this workshop.

The Internet Governance Forum 2013 is being held at Bali from October 22 to 25. The overarching theme for the 2013 IGF meeting is: "Building Bridges"- Enhancing Multistakeholder Cooperation for Growth and Sustainable Development".

Read the original published on IGF website. Also read it on Internet & Jurisdiction website.

Theme: Legal Frameworks and Cyber-crime (Spam, Cyber-security, etc.)

This workshop is organized by the Internet & Jurisdiction Project, a global multi-stakeholder dialogue process launched in January 2012, which engages key actors from states, international organizations, companies, civil society, academia and the technical community from all around the world to address the tension between the cross-border Internet and national jurisdictions.

Over 2,5 billion Internet users interact in shared cross-border online spaces where they can post content potentially accessible worldwide. On the one hand platforms’ Terms of Service try to set transnational rules on acceptable postings, but on the other hand content that is legal in one jurisdiction can be illegal or sensitive in other territories. No clear frameworks exist yet to handle the tensions between these competing normative orders or values and enable peaceful cohabitation in cross-border cyberspaces. This challenge constitutes a rare issue of common concern for all stakeholder groups.

Building upon the intersessional work conducted by the Internet & Jurisdiction Project since the 2012 IGF, the roundtable will address the following topics:

Can commonly agreed interoperability procedures ensure fair process in interactions between platforms, public authorities, technical operators and users regarding seizures, content takedowns and access to user data? regarding seizures, content takedowns and LEA access to user data? - See more at: http://www.internetjurisdiction.net/igf2013-workshop/#sthash.q6PQ3uMn.dpuf

How could appropriate multi-stakeholder frameworks be developed?

Note: This roundtable is listed above under the “legal frameworks and cybercrime” track. However it equally touches upon other thematic areas: Human Rights/ Freedom of Expression on the Internet (addressing takedown procedures); Internet Governance Principles (eg. fair process and accountability) and Principles of Multi-Stakeholder Cooperation (the development of mutual frameworks).

Has the proponent organised a workshop with a similar subject during past IGF meetings?

Yes

Indication of how the workshop will build on but go beyond the outcomes previously reached

At the IGF 2012, after a year of interaction with different stakeholders, the Internet & Jurisdiction Project organized two workshops titled: “What is the Geography of Cyberspace?” and “What frameworks for cross-border online communities and services?” These sessions explored the roots of the tension between the Internet and the patchwork of national jurisdictions and examined how to address this common concern. Both these two workshops and the ongoing dialogue facilitated by the I&JProject in 2013 (including several preparatory meetings around the world) confirmed the need to explore how to develop appropriate frameworks to handle the tension in a multi-stakeholder setting. Therefore, the I&J Project will gather involved stakeholders at the 2013 workshop “Fair process frameworks for cross-border online spaces” to discuss the way forward: How could appropriate frameworks be developed and what commonly agreed interoperability procedures could ensure fair process?

Background Paper: No background paper provided

Session Type: Roundtable

Mr. Bertrand De La Chapelle, Internet & Jurisdiction Project, Civil Society, France, Western Europe and Others Group - WEOG

Mr. Paul Fehlinger, Internet & Jurisdiction Project, Civil Society, Germany, Western Europe and Others Group - WEOG

Have the Proponent or any of the co-organisers organised an IGF workshop before?

Yes

The link(s) to the workshop report(s):

Panelists

Please click on biography to view the biography of the panelist:

Fiona Alexander, Department of Commerce, NTIA, Female, Government, United States, Western Europe and Others Group – WEOG
Biography
Anne Carblanc, OECD, Female, Intergovernmental Organizations, France, Western Europe and Others Group – WEOG
Biography
Elvana Thaci, Council of Europe, Female, Intergovernmental Organizations, France, Western Europe and Others Group – WEOG
Biography
Sunil Abraham, Centre for Internet & Society, Male, Civil Society, India, Asia-Pacific Group
Biography
Anriette Esterhuysen, Association for Progressive Communications, Female, Civil Society, South Africa, African Group
Biography
Carlos Affonso Pereira Da Souza, Fundacao Getulio Vargas, Male, Technical Community, BRAZIL, Latin American and Caribbean Group – GRULAC
Biography
Ross Lajeunesse, Google, Male, Private Sector, United States, Western Europe and Others Group – WEOG Biography
Ebele Okobi, Yahoo, Female, Private Sector, United States, Western Europe and Others Group – WEOG
Biography
Linda Corugedo Steneberg, European Commission, Belgium, Western Europe and Others Group – WEOG
Biography

Agenda

Can commonly agreed interoperability procedures ensure fair process in interactions between platforms, public authorities, technical operators and users regarding seizures, content takedowns and access to user data?
How could appropriate multi-stakeholder frameworks be developed?

Inclusiveness of the Session

The format of the workshop is going to be an open roundtable discussion between a diverse group of stakeholders on the basis of a structured agenda, without formal presentations. Taking stock of the preparatory process with meetings around the world, the participants will be able to discuss the outcomes of the multi-stakeholder dialogue process, explore the components of possible frameworks and how to move forward. The objective is to produce a structured but fluid and dynamic discussion that includes the audience in the debate.

Suitability for Remote Participation

In addition to the remote participation tools provided by the IGF, the session will be covered live on Twitter with a dedicated hashtag and questions can also be submitted through tweets to open the discussion and engage new stakeholders. Moreover, participants of the Internet & Jurisdiction dialogue process around the world will be encouraged to participate remotely in the discussion.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/igf-2013-workshop-42-fair-process-frameworks-for-cross-border-online-spaces

Factcheck: No, phones of users who provided only Aadhaar as proof of identity won’t be disconnected

Admin — 2018-10-28T06:13:12Z

Ever since the Supreme Court’s judgment on Aadhaar, which prohibited the use of the 12-digit biometrics-linked unique identity number by private entities as well as its linking with phone numbers and bank accounts, telecom companies and their customers in particular are wondering what this means for them.

The blog post by Kanishk Karan was published in Scroll.in on October 18, 2018. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

On Thursday, the Times of India reported that crores of mobile phone connections face the “prospect of disconnection” if their SIM cards are not backed up by identity documents other than Aadhaar. The report also appeared on TimesNowHindi. The reports prompted the Union government to issue a statement insisting that the disconnection concerns are “completely untrue and imaginary”. But questions still remain about what comes next.

Joint statement

The news reports said that 50 crore mobile phone customers – who had used only Aadhaar to verify their identity as part of the Know Your Customer verification process, which became mandatory for all phone numbers last year – will need to re-verify their identity using alternative documents or face disconnection. This is because the Supreme Court verdict had concluded that linking Aadhaar to mobile connections, even voluntarily, is illegal.

In a joint press statement on Thursday, the Department of Telecommunication and Unique Identification Authority of India, the body that oversees Aadhaar, refuted this claim. The statement said that a “few news reports” have tried to create “unnecessary panic” by claiming that phone numbers may be at risk of disconnection. It insisted that those customers who used only Aadhaar for their verification process could use other documents to re-verify their identities, without being worried about their phones being disconnected. “In any case her/his mobile no. will not be disconnected,” the statement said. “What Supreme Court has done is that it has prohibited issue of new SIM cards via Aadhaar eKYC process due to lack of a law. There is no direction to deactivate the old mobile phones.”

The statement made it clear that telecom companies cannot ask for Aadhaar as proof of identity when issuing new SIMs. The authorities also used the statement to clarify a few other questions that have come up following the September 26 Aadhaar verdict.

Aadhaar data

One of the big sources of confusion that the verdict created was the Aadhaar data that telecom companies had already collected while carrying out Know Your Customer verification for phone numbers over the last year. The verdict seemed to suggest that all such data needs to be deleted within a certain time frame.

But the joint statement insists that this direction only applies to UIDAI and not to telecom companies. “The Court has also not asked to delete all the eKYC data of telecom customers after six months,” it said. The statement claims that the verdict only orders the UIDAI to delete the authentication data it holds, and, in fact, says that telecom companies are mandated to keep that data and that “there is no need” for them to delete it.

But not everyone agrees with this interpretation of the judgment.

Prasanna S, one of the lawyers who appeared on behalf of those petitioning against Aadhaar in the Supreme Court, said that the statement’s claim that telecoms do not need to delete Aadhaar data is wrong.

The Aadhaar ruling was a 4:1 majority judgment with Justice DY Chandrachud the sole dissident.

“The government and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India [should have issued] direction on the directive given by the Supreme Court to delete data within two weeks,” he said, referring to the portion of Chandrachud’s dissenting opinion in the verdict. Chandrachud had disagreed with the majority on a number of issues. But all five judges on the bench had agreed that linking Aadhaar to phone numbers was unconstitutional and posed a grave threat to privacy, liberty and autonomy of individuals. In his order, Chandrachud issued directions for Aadhaar data to be deleted within two weeks, which some lawyers believe should be binding even though it was in the dissenting opinion.

New authentication app

Since telecom companies can no longer use Aadhaar-based verification to authenticate new customers, the statement also said that the Department of Telecom and UIDAI are working on a mobile application that will perform the gask instead. According to the statement, when carrying out the authentication of a new SIM, the application will capture a “live photograph”, including location coordinates and a time stamp. Along with the live photograph, the application will require other government-issued identification documents such as voter ID or passport.

While that may solve the problem of having a simple authentication process instead of Aadhaar, questions have been raised about whether this procedure is vulnerable to fraud.

Pranesh Prakash, a fellow at the Centre for Internet and Society, said as of now it is unclear how the government would find a way to prevent “a single live photo being used multiple times”. If the same photo is used for issuing three SIM cards by the agent, would the government be any wiser, he wondered. Prakash said that, rather than the technology infrastructure, the important area to focus here is the security loopholes in the identity verification process.

Earlier this year, UIDAI had introduced a number of new provisions, including the virtual ID and face authentication, saying it will make fraud and data leaks less likely, as well as make it easier for those who are facing trouble with biometric authentication. Later, the directive was put on hold by the Department of Telecom. Thursday’s statement suggests a similar application, using live photos, but does not say when this technology will be rolled out.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/scroll-kanishk-karan-october-18-2018-factcheck-no-phones-of-users-who-provided-only-aadhaar-as-proof-of-identity-wont-be-disconnected

Facial Recognition Technology in India

Elonnai Hickok, Pallavi Bedi, Aman Nair and Amber Sinha — 2021-09-02T16:21:24Z

The Human Rights, Big Data and Technology Project, University of Essex, UK and the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) have jointly published a research paper on facial recognition technology. Authors, Elonnai Hickok, Pallavi Bedi, Aman Nair and Amber Sinha, examine technological tools such as CCTV and FRT which are increasingly being deployed by the government.

Executive Summary

Over the past two decades there has been a sustained effort at digitising India’s governance structure in order to foster development and innovation. The field of law enforcement and safety has seen significant change in that direction, with technological tools such as Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) and Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) increasingly being deployed by the government.

Yet for all its increased use, there is still a lack of a coherent legal and regulatory framework governing FRT in India. Towards informing such a framework, this paper seeks to document present uses of FRT in India, specifically by law enforcement agencies and central and state governments, understand the applicability of existing legal frameworks to the use of FRT, and define key areas that need to be addressed when using the technology in India. We also briefly look at how the coverage of FRT has increased beyond law enforcement; it now covers educational institutions, employment purposes, and it is now being used for providing Covid-19 vaccines.

We begin by examining use cases of FRT systems by various divisions of central and state governments. In doing so, it becomes apparent that there is a lack of uniform standards or guidelines at either the state or central level - leading to different FRT systems having differing standards of applicability and scope of use. And while the use of such systems seems to be growing at a rapid rate, questions around their legality persist.

It is unclear whether the use of FRT is compliant with the fundamental right to privacy as affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2017 in Puttaswamy. While the right to privacy is not an absolute right, for the state to curtail this right, the restrictions will have to comply with a three-fold requirement— first, being the need for explicit legislative mandate in instances where the government looks to curtail the right. However, the FRT systems we have analysed do not have such a mandate and are often the result of administrative or executive decisions with no legislative blessing or judicial oversight.

We further locate the use of FRT technology within the country’s wider legislative, judicial and constitutional frameworks governing surveillance. We also briefly articulate comparative perspectives on the use of FRT in other jurisdictions. We further analyse the impact of the proposed Personal Data Protection Bill on the deployment of FRT. Finally, we propose a set of recommendations to develop a path forward for the technology’s use which include the need for a comprehensive legal and regulatory framework that governs the use of FRT. Such a framework must take into consideration the necessity of use, proportionality, consent, security, retention, redressal mechanisms, purpose limitation, and other such principles. Since the use of FRT in India is also at a nascent stage, it is imperative that there is greater public research and dialogue into its development and use to ensure that any harms that may arise in the field are mitigated.

Click to download the entire research paper here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/hrbdt-and-cis-august-31-2021-facial-recognition-technology-in-india

Facial Recognition Technology in India

Elonnai Hickok, Pallavi Bedi, Aman Nair and Amber Sinha — 2021-09-02T16:17:44Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/facial-recognition-technology-in-india.pdf

Facebook: Limiting access to social media can restrict freedom of speech

praskrishna — 2013-08-08T04:07:38Z

In its counter-affidavit to the PIL in the Delhi high court, Facebook has argued that limiting access to social media can limit an individual's freedom of speech and expression.

Kim Arora's article was published in the Times of India on August 1, 2013. Sunil Abraham is quoted.

The PIL, among other things, deals with the issue of minors accessing Facebook services, arguing that under the Indian Contract Act 1872, minors can't enter into a contract. The PIL will be heard next on Friday.

Last year, the UN Human Rights Council had passed a resolution declaring access to Internet as a human right. Facebook has argued making a similar point for access to social media. "The Internet is increasingly becoming a platform for citizens including minors to interact and voice their opinions and, therefore, a meaningful interpretation of the right to freedom of speech and expression would include the freedom to access social media," the counter-affidavit says.

"It can be argued that in a technologically mediated society, social media and communication infrastructure is essential to exercise freedom of expression," says Sunil Abraham, director, Bangalore-based Center for Internet and Society.

Cyber lawyer Pavan Duggal sees it as "hyperbole". "The issue still remains that a minor doesn't have the capacity to act under the Contract Act," he says. Lawyers say that if a contract is entered into for free service in exchange of personal information, it is a "consideration" (like cash or kind) under the Indian Contract Act 1872. The Act says, "All agreements are contracts if they are made by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be void." It then lists minors as incompetent to contract, and says, "The agreement, if any party is minor, is void ab initio." However, Abraham points out that "It is not an offence to enter a void contract."

To weed out fake profiles and children's profiles, the PIL, filed by former RSS ideologue K N Govindacharya, argues that "obligation is cast upon Facebook and other social networking sites to verify the authenticity of each and every subscribers (sic) which is mandatory for Mobile companies in telecommunication sector.

Mumbai-based professor of law Saurav Datta feels this sort of authentication could have serious privacy implications. "There is no way they can verify users without impinging on their privacy. The goal of the PIL is wrong. We need to protect children, not keep people out," says Datta.

Abraham says that a possible way to deal with this can be on the lines of Canadian privacy law where a privacy commissioner can raise such concerns with the service provider directly.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-times-of-india-aug-1-2013-kim-arora-facebook-limiting-access-to-social-media-can-restrict-freedom-of-speech

Facebook: A Platform with Little Less Sharing of Personal Information

nishant — 2016-06-05T02:38:22Z

As Facebook becomes less personal, what happens to digital friendship?

The article was published in the Indian Express on May 8, 2016.

Facebook is worried. Even though usage is growing, something strange is happening on the social network. For the first time since it started its journey as a website to rate datable people on college campuses, to becoming the global reference point that defined friendship in the connected age, people are sharing less personal information on Facebook. For a social media network that positions itself largely as a space where our everyday, banal doings become newsworthy articulations, this is surprising news. But it is true. On Facebook, the traffic is high, but most of it is now sharing of external information. People are sharing links to news, to listicles, to videos, to blogs entries, to pictures and to information that they find interesting, but they are writing less and less about what it is that they are doing and feeling.

Ironically, this coincides with the latest change in Facebook’s “response” options, where the ubiquitous “Like” button can now expand to other emojis where you can also be appropriately angry, sad, surprised, or happy about the shared content. Even as Facebook is trying to get its users to qualify how they feel and give emotional value to their likes, people seem to be sharing even less of their private lives on Facebook.

One of the key ways of understanding this drop in people sharing their personal information is through the concept of “context collapse”. It has been a concern since the first instances of disembodied digital communication. In our everyday life, we make sense of information based on the different contexts that surround us. The person who authors the information, the setting within which that information reaches us, the emotional state that we are in when encountering the information, our sense of where we are when processing it, and the preparedness we have for receiving this information are all crucial parameters by which we make sense of the meaning of the information and also our response to it.

In the case of Facebook, the context within which information and transactions have made sense is “friendship”. The site’s USP was that you could bring in a variety of information, but you were always sharing it with friends. You could have a large audience, but this audience is formed of people you know, people you trust, people you add to your friend groups — there is a sense of intimacy, privacy, and casualness that marks the flow of information. You are able to talk, in an equal breath, about what you had for breakfast, your crush on a celebrity, your random acts of charity, and your strong political rant, one after the other, without requiring to think about what you are posting and how others will receive it.

However, Facebook is not really a friendship platform. It is a company interested in selling our interactions and data to advertisers who can target us with content and information based on the patterns of our behaviour. To serve its advertisers better, Facebook started privileging “verified” information trying to ensure news and content producers higher attention and more eyeballs. This was further strengthened by their continued integration with third party vendors, who could push and pull information into the social world of Facebook, and is seen as one of the biggest reasons for this drop. Any newsfeed in the last few months has had equal amounts of professional and amateur content, leading to a context collapse, where you no longer feel like your Facebook feed is a private and intimate conversation with friends.

Similarly, Facebook’s expansive integration of its products —WhatsApp chats, Instagram updates, and Tumblr posts all can collapse into one — produced a confusing space where the personal information that you were once happy to share with your friends, is suddenly being shared along with news and information. Also, digital behaviour works on mirroring, and we often shape our updates to match what we see on our timelines. If we more and more see external content rather than personal statuses, we also start sharing more third party news and links, thus producing a domino effect of everybody shying away from extremely personal or intimate moments.

Facebook, for the millennials, has been the context within which friendship got structured. Its own transitions have now collapsed that context, leading people to think of it as a content aggregator. It is going to be interesting to see what happens to our digital friendships and networks if Facebook is no longer the space where they are housed.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/indian-express-nishant-shah-may-8-2016-facebook-a-platform-with-little-less-sharing-of-personal-information

Facebook’s Libra: A bit too ambitious?

Rajmohan Sudhakar — 2019-07-02T05:14:56Z

Power desperately finds ways to propagate at the slightest hint of losing lustre, which the social network is beginning to experience at the moment.

The article by Rajmohan Sudhakar was published in the Deccan Herald on June 30, 2019. Sunil Abraham was quoted.

A social network must remain a social network and first prove it is indeed one. Not a bank. Damning revelations concerning ethics, privacy and transparency notwithstanding.

For a tech giant with an exclusive window to our private lives, launching its own currency is of course the natural course, to coax us back into compliance, away from brewing skepticism.

Facebook’s sketchy white paper on Libra, its proposed virtual currency, probably drawing much from the libertarian Bitcoin, is no doubt an attempt to capitalise on the 2.4 billion users it has collected in such a short span, eventually to wield a grip on the still vulnerable global financial system gradually recovering from a crisis.

However, the brute power of big tech looms large over sovereign nation states.

In his piece in The Atlantic, professor Eric Posner of the University of Chicago Law School writes Libra will replicate all the current problems generated by Facebook. “In the name of eliminating inefficiency and injustice in the financial system around the globe, Facebook’s new cryptocurrency threatens to replay what’s become a familiar story—of tech companies blithely reshaping the world around them, and significantly increasing their power over people’s lives, while being accountable to no one,” the professor goes on to say.

Power finds ways to propagate at the slightest hint of losing lustre, which the social network is beginning to experience at the moment.

To salvage that lost credibility, Facebook has teamed up with a group of corporates including Visa, Uber, Spotify, PayPal and the like to form the Libra Association, a Geneva-based not-for-profit, just to disrupt and dominate the global economic future.

Given the social network’s massive reach, the proposal, if realised, could transform international payments. That said, the intent is suspect.

“The main concern with Facebook entering the cryptocurrency market is a question of competition law. Facebook can use its market dominance in online advertising, end-to-end encrypted messaging and social media to engage in anti-competitive behaviour, warns Sunil Abraham of The Centre for Internet and Society, a Bengaluru-based not-for-profit.

Facebook stands 90th in the world in terms of GDP, along with many other firms of such standing which would want to effect and dictate global monetary policy if the project goes ahead and realises its commercial goal, which in all likelihood is very much possible. Because, Facebook has built its applications and networks already. It doesn’t require to sign people up. Lambs for slaughter indeed.

The argument that the network puts forward of uplifting billions excluded from the financial ecosystem in the emerging world, in earnest is a genuine cause. But, one doesn’t need a brand new private currency pepped up by a big tech consortium for that. For instance, in India, where the network has at least 300 million users, Libra cannot operate within the existing norms. Moreover, a foreign private entity controlling the sovereign is rather dystopian.

“So far, India has taken quite a conservative policy towards cryptocurrencies because of concerns from a counter-terrorism and taxation perspective. It is perhaps good that policymakers were waiting and watching. Now the policy will have to address the challenge posed by Facebook entering this market,” notes Abraham.

“Cryptocurrency is ‘virtual money’ which should only be used for non-financial purposes along the lines of loyalty points, airline miles, etc. which could be exchanged for real cash transactions such as discounts. It poses the danger of fraud. If Facebook uses Libra to clock up loyalty points, that’s fine. But can’t link it to your bank account,” cautions Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw.To digress, bitcoin works as people trust it over government-regulated money. It has no reserve. It appreciates if more people are using it. Now, Facebook is offering a tweak. Unlike Bitcoin, Libra will have a reserve set up by the consortium. In short, don’t trust the government, not the liberal bitcoin, but a private entity with a reserve.
Facebook’s argument may be convincing provided the clout, security infrastructure and reach. But what is worrying is Facebook-led big tech now wants to be a virtual country, with its own economy, not having to bow down to nation states and regulators, because they think they are powerful enough to do so.
This would definitely have banks and regulators in a fix. “While Facebook might have a surveillance friendly position on KYC requirements for users, it might be in greater consumer interest for the government to ensure there is an interoperable competitive oligopoly of cryptocurrency service providers that prevent the winner takes all phenomenon,” observes Abraham.
What’s Libra anyway?
Libra is a virtual currency proposed by a Facebook-led private consortium, with a reserve, unlike the Bitcoin. That means Libra would have an initial capital funded by the consortium to help make it a stable currency such as the dollar. Users could trade globally enjoying lower costs, enhanced speed and high security - on platforms run by Facebook (Calibra) and associates. According to Facebook, Libra is intended to ensure financial inclusion. But how this will be achieved in countries like India, where the currency would not charm the people, government or regulators easily, is not yet quite clear.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/deccan-herald-june-30-2019-rajmohan-sudhakar-facebook-s-libra-a-bit-too-ambitious

Facebook’s Free Internet Access Program in Developing Countries Provokes Backlash

praskrishna — 2015-09-29T16:35:02Z

In India and Indonesia, users criticize Internet.org initiative, saying it violates the principles of net neutrality.

The article by Newley Purnell and Resty Woro Uniar was published in the Wall Street Journal on September 24, 2015. Sunil Abraham gave inputs.

When Muhammad Maiyagy Gery heard about a new mobile app from Facebook Inc. that provides free Internet access in his native Indonesia, he was excited.

But after testing it, the 24-year-old student from a mining town on the eastern edge of Borneo soon deleted the app, called Internet.org, frustrated that he was unable to access Google. com and some local Indonesian sites.

Mr. Gery said Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg is an “inspiration in the tech world,” but added that the company’s free Internet effort is “inadequate.”

Mr. Gery’s reaction illustrates the unexpected criticism Facebook has encountered to its bold initiative to bring free Internet access to the world’s four billion people who don’t have it, and to increase connectivity among those with limited access. He is one of many users who say a Facebook-led partnership is providing truncated access to websites, thwarting the principles of what is known in the U.S. as net neutrality—the view that Internet providers shouldn’t be able to dictate consumer access to websites.

Since Mr. Zuckerberg’s announcement of the $1 billion project two years ago, Facebook has launched Internet.org in 19 countries across Asia, Latin America and Africa by teaming up with mobile carriers and technology giants including Samsung Electronics Co. , chip maker Qualcomm Inc. and telecom-equipment firm Ericsson AB. Facebook says that through the initiative, in which it is also experimenting with drones and satellites to deliver Web access, some nine million people have come online.

Users with data-enabled feature phones can access a special website through a mobile browser, while those with smartphones can download the app from Google’s Play Store. Though arrangements vary by country, the Internet.org app typically provides a simplified, low-data version of Facebook, its Messenger service and selected local websites offering services like jobs, health information and sports updates. Facebook says it works with mobile operators, which provide free data, and governments to pick sites for the platform.

While some applaud the Internet initiative, the U.S. company is dealing with a backlash from users in some of its fastest-growing markets like Indonesia and India, which are key to its future expansion.

In response to the criticism, Mr. Zuckerberg earlier this year wrote an opinion article that appeared in two Indian newspapers defending the project. He argued that the initiative is compatible with the principles of net neutrality, and that if people “can’t afford to pay for connectivity, it is always better to have some access and voice than none at all.”

But criticism about the initiative has placed Facebook in an awkward position. The social network along with other tech companies like Amazon.com Inc. and Twitter Inc. are members of the U.S. industry group Internet Association, which advocates for net neutrality, among other issues. In markets like Indonesia and India, critics say Facebook is more interested in controlling which websites users can tap into than in ensuring free Internet access. “It’s not Internet.org. It’s walled garden.org,” said Sunil Abraham, head of the Bangalore, India-based Center for Internet and Society.

Facebook wants to be seen as a pioneer “of the open and free Internet and not the opposite,” said Neha Dharia, an analyst at telecommunications research firm Ovum.

On Thursday, Facebook said it was changing the name of the Internet.org app and mobile website to Free Basics by Facebook in order to better distinguish it from the company’s wider Internet.org initiative. Asked whether the change was related to criticism of the project, a Facebook spokeswoman said that the name will “more intuitively describe the product to consumers.”

Chris Daniels, Facebook’s vice president in charge of the project, said in a recent interview that he has been surprised by the criticism of the project, noting that many people have gained access to the Web.

This spring in India, travel website Cleartrip, news channel NDTV and a mobile news app pulled their content from the platform amid concerns over net neutrality.

Cleartrip referred inquiries about its reasons for leaving the initiative to an April statement it posted on its website. In that statement, the company said the backlash in India “gave us pause to rethink our approach to Internet.org and the idea of large corporations getting involved with picking and choosing who gets access to what and how fast.”

Vishal Anand, chief product officer at mobile news app Dailyhunt, said that “While we appreciate the effort to give people Internet access, we fully support the principles of net neutrality.” He declined to elaborate on the company’s specific objections to Internet.org.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/wsj-september-24-2015-newley-purnell-resty-woro-uniar-facebook-free-internet-access-program-in-developing-countries-provokes-backlash