We are anonymous, we are legion

Will The International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs) Impact Internet Governance? A Multistakeholder Perspective

pranesh — 2012-12-10T04:40:11Z

Pranesh Prakash made a presentation at the India Internet Governance Conference (IIGC) held at the FICCI, Federation House, Tansen Marg, New Delhi on October 4 and 5, 2012. The event was organised by the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, FICCI and Internet Society. CIS was one of the supporting organisations.

Principles

I'll outline some broad principles that should be kept in mind while deciding on proposals for the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITR).

Any proposal should be considered for the ITR if an only if it satisfies all the below criteria:

Only if international regulation is needed

If only national regulation is sufficient, then ITR is not the right place for it.
International roaming price transparency, for instance, is an issue where international cooperation is required.

Only if it is a technical issue limited to telecommunications networks and interoperability

On the issues of 'security', if it is strictly about network security, then it is fine.

ITU already does some standard setting work around this.

If it about security of root server operations, or DNS, etc., that's not around telecommunications, despite being a technical issue.
If it is about criminal activities on telecommunications networks, that is not a technical issue.

Only if it is something that can be decided at the level of states.

Multistakeholder issues should not end up at the ITU, since the ITU is not a multistakeholder body.
This principle has been accepted by the ITU itself in the Geneva Declaration as well as the Tunis Agenda.

Only if it proposes to address a proven harm

The ETNO proposal, for instance, does not make it very clear why they think current interconnection system is a problem.

Though the ETNO proposal says that it is required to enable "fair compensation", "sustainable development of telecom", it does so without showing why the current payment mechanisms are unsustainable, or how telecom industry has changed lately, or even how moving from voice to data (even for voice) is going to affect "sustainable development of telecom".
Geoff Huston provides the wonderful example of how ten years ago, content providers were asking for fair compensation from telecom providers ("content is being provided free, while ISPs charge customers; ISPs are worthless without content, hence ISPs need to share revenue with content providers"). Now the opposite argument is being made by telecom operators.

Airtel in India has publicly asked Google and Facebook for revenue sharing.

Rohan Samarajiva of LIRNEasia

He believes ETNO proposal is bad for developing countries.

Adverse unintended effect of ETNO proposal ("sending-party network pays") is that less traffic will be directed towards poorer regions without the ability (whether through ad sales, or otherwise) to justify that expenditure by the sender.

ISOC paper is one of the most in-depth analysis so far.

They strongly believe it is going to be bad for Internet

Truth is that there has been no clear economic study so far of the potential impact. Hence counting benefits without proper analysis is risky.

Only if there's no better place than ITU

If another existing organization like ICANN or IETF can look at it, then ITU should not take over.

If all the above principles are satisfied, then the question becomes:

Does the proposal further substantive principles, such as:
Development
Competition and prevention of monopolies
Etc.

If the proposal does advance such substantive principles, then we should ask what kind of regulation is needed: Whether mandatory or not whether it is the minimal amount required to achieve the policy objectives.

Conclusion

Indian government's positions on the specific proposals to the ITR haven't yet been made public.

But the India government has taken a public position on the larger issue before: the IBSA statement on Enhanced Cooperation from December 2010. the IBSA reaffirms its commitment to the stability and security of the Internet as a global facility based on the full participation of all stakeholders, from both developed and developing countries, within their respective roles and responsibilities in line with paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda.

"The management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations."

Demonization of the ITU is not good, though some in civil society have engaged in it, and is not the issue here. * After all, ITU was a core part of the WSIS process that led to the multistakeholder system. * ITU does have its own role to play in Internet governance.

Importantly, transparency and public participation is required. * We have signed an international civil society letter asking ITU to be more transparent. This has had a little impact; more documents are now out in the public. And there's now WCITLeaks.org * The Indian government must hold inclusive meetings with all relevant experts and stakeholders, including civil society organizations and academics.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/will-the-international-telecommunication-regulations-itrs-impact-internet-governance-a-multistakeholder-perspective

Will Only Legal Backing For Aadhaar Suffice?

praskrishna — 2016-03-16T02:31:52Z

Aadhaar is set to become mandatory, but the opponents of the scheme are not amused. Concerns about privacy of the Aadhaar number and the authenticity of the biometric data being collected have been expressed by people right from the beginning. But the government has not done much to address these issues.

The article was published in New Indian Express on March 14, 2016. Sunil Abraham was quoted.

“It does not matter what legislative backing they give it, it is still a surveillance programme. How can you have a privacy Bill for a surveillance programme? Legislative backing would be band-aid. I do not agree with it,” says Sunil Abraham, Executive Director of The Centre for Internet and Society. The society is a Bengaluru-based organisation looking at multi-disciplinary research and advocacy.

Abraham says that ever since the Aadhaar scheme was implemented, there was a massive degradation of civil liberties. “It is an opaque technology. Why should the government have such a database?” he asks.

Abraham says that the keys to the data should not have rested with the government where it is vulnerable. Instead, the government should have explored the concept of introducing smart cards issued to the citizen with the data stored on it.

Access to this data could not be had without the permission of the citizen, he says. At present, if something goes wrong or if the data is compromised, the government can always blame a lapse in technology, Abraham adds.

He questions the government’s logic where it assumes that only the poor section of society can misuse the benefits and says that it is well known that the problem exists in the supply chain and that the government has done nothing to address this.

Mathew Thomas of The Fifth Estate, an NGO, wonders what advantage the BJP suddenly found that they decided to pursue Aadhaar rather than send it to the trash bin as they had promised before the general elections.

Thomas says Aadhaar is flawed and is a fraud on the Constitution and the government has taken the money bill route simply to avoid a debate on it.

“Just passing a Bill is meaningless. This is radically wrong and we all know that protection of privacy is nonsense. How do they plan to plug the leakages? Have they even conducted a study, because there is no evidence of it. The correct beneficiary can get an LPG cylinder, but what is stopping the person from using it for an auto or for his car? That the government can lie to its own people is terrible,” he says.

A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, which is hearing the matter on privacy concerns about Aadhaar, is expected to have a hearing by the end of this month.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/new-indian-express-march-14-2016-will-only-legal-backing-for-aadhaar-suffice

Will Modi govt move on Kashmir’s Article 370 stand the scrutiny of Supreme Court?

Admin — 2019-08-07T13:44:26Z

Many scholars have questioned the constitutional validity of Narendra Modi government's decision to scrap Article 370 that gives special status to Jammu & Kashmir.

The article by Print was published on August 6, 2019. Pranesh Prakash was consulted.

Legally, Supreme Court should not stand by Modi govt’s decision to scrap Article 370

In the first case regarding Article 370 (Prem Nath Kaul v. State, 1959), the Supreme Court underscored the importance of the Jammu & Kashmir constituent assembly’s role. But in two other cases (Sampat Prakash v. State, 1968, and MM Damnoo v. State, 1972), it differed without even citing the 1959 case.

Some might argue that given the number of presidential orders passed under Article 370, starting with the Nehru government, there is little left to protect in the article. That’s partially true, but it is also true that Article 370 symbolises a contract between the state of Jammu & Kashmir and the Indian Union, which was negotiated as a condition of its accession to India. It doesn’t allow for the President to unilaterally abolish the article without the recommendation of the constituent assembly of the state. Monday’s presidential order will not stand judicial scrutiny. That’s why, despite the constant erosion of Article 370, it is still politically and legally unacceptable.

If this is allowed by the Supreme Court, then the federal nature of the country will cease to be, along with its democratic nature.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/the-print-august-6-2019-will-modi-govt-move-on-kashmir-article-370-stand-the-scrutiny-of-supreme-court

Will Indians have to pay for WhatsApp?

pranesh — 2015-08-24T02:00:56Z

India's Department of Telecommunications (DoT) formed a panel in January 2015 to look into net neutrality in the country.

This was originally published by BBC on July 25. Pranesh Prakash has been quoted.

Net neutrality means service providers should treat all traffic equally. Users should be able to access all websites at the same speed and cost.

A battle to decide the future of the internet in India is being fought online, between telecom users and operators.

The panel has now released its report to the public and invited comments. Pranesh Prakash from the Centre for Internet Studies decodes the report and what it means for Indians.

What does the panel say?

Internet-based Over-the-top (OTT) communication services like WhatsApp, Viber, and the like are currently taking advantage of "regulatory arbitrage", meaning that the regulations that apply to non-Internet based communications services (telephone calls) are different from OTT communications services.

Under current rules, the OTT services don't have to get a licence from the government, don't have to abide by anti-spam, do-not-disturb regulations, share any revenue with the government or abide by national security conditions. The panel wants to bring these services under a licensing regime.

The report distinguishes between Internet-based voice calls (voice over IP, or VoIP) and messaging services and doesn't wish to interfere with the latter. This means it could regulate services like Skype, Viber and WhatsApp calls but not WhatsApp or Viber messages. It also distinguishes between domestic and international VoIP calls, and believes only the former need regulation. It is unclear on what basis these distinctions are made.

The core principles of net neutrality - which are undefined in the report, though definitions proposed in submissions they've received are quoted - should be adhered to. In the long-run, these should find place in a new law, but for the time being they can be enforced through the licence agreement between the government and telecom providers.

Where does the panel report go wrong?

The proposal by the panel to regulate VoIP services like Skype or Viber is a terrible idea.

Many important terms are left undefined, and many distinctions that the report draws are left unexplained. For instance, it is unclear on what regulatory basis the report distinguishes between domestic and international VoIP calls or between regulation of messaging services and VoIP services.

Will it increase cost of access to WhatsApp and Viber?

"Zero-rating" is a policy whereby telecoms providers agree not to pass on the costs of handling the data traffic so that consumers can receive services for free.

On the one hand, this could decrease the cost of access to WhatsApp and Viber. But that might not be allowed because free services could harm competition and distort markets.

Whether this will lead to consumers paying for WhatsApp and similar services depends on what kinds of regulations are placed on them, and if any costs are imposed on them.

Does the report uphold net neutrality?

The report is clear that it strongly endorses the "core principles of net neutrality".

On the issue of "zero-rating" the panel proposes some sound measures, saying that there should be a two-part mechanism for ensuring that "harmful" zero-rating doesn't go through.

First, telecom services need to submit "zero-rating" tariff proposals to an expert body constituted by telecoms department.

Second, consumers will be able to complain about the harmful usage of "zero-rating" by any service provider, which may result in a fine.

Where have people got the report wrong?

There have been reports saying that the panel has recommended increased charges for domestic VoIP calls. This is untrue.

There are reports saying the panel has given the go-ahead for all forms of zero-rating. Once again, this is untrue. The panel cites instances of zero-rating that aren't discriminatory, violative of net neutrality and don't harm competition or distort consumer markets (such as zero-rating of all Internet traffic for a limited time period). Then it goes on to state that the regulator should not allow zero-rating that violates the core principles of net neutrality.

Pranesh Prakash is policy director at the Centre for Internet and Society. A longer article he wrote on the panel report can be accessed here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/bbc-july-25-2015-will-indians-have-to-pay-for-whatsapp

Will India win net neutrality battle?

praskrishna — 2016-01-11T02:28:44Z

There is more than what meets the eye in Facebook’s ‘noble mission’ of providing internet for all.

The article by Pratap Vikram Singh and Taru Bhatia was published by Governance Now on January 5, 2016. Sunil Abraham gave inputs.

India is gearing up for an era of startups and entrepreneurship and the man pushing it as one of his biggest development and self reliance agenda is none other than prime minister Narendra Modi, who launched the ‘Startup India, Standup India’ campaign this year. Few technology giants, led by the likes of Facebook and some telecom service providers, however, have thrown a technology spanner. It is important to note that a significant number of the startups in India are internet-based – next only to the US and China in having maximum number of tech startups, according to industry body NASSCOM.

For these to flourish and for India to have next Facebook or Google it is important to have an open and neutral internet, believe digital rights experts. A network which doesn’t discriminate between the data packets (smallest unit of information sent in binary format over a network) and provides level playing field for all. “It is critical for the Startup India campaign. If we let the principles of net neutrality be compromised, then it makes it very difficult for entrepreneurs and startups to compete against established players, who can close off the market for upstarts by schemes like differentiated pricing and zero rating (toll free access to websites or apps),” said Vishal Misra, associate professor, department of computer science, Columbia University.

A prerequisite for startups

A few months from now, country’s telecom regulator, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), is going to decide whether internet would remain neutral and whether it will continue to foster innovation. A major threat to net neutrality, according to civil society and digital rights experts, comes from zero rating – toll free access to a few selected websites or apps, a strategy adopted by internet service providers or internet platforms to hook users to those select few sites. For telecom and internet service providers zero rating is a new stream of revenue, a way to secure optimal return on investment from their existing subscriber base – without requiring additional investment. The ISPs are arguing that they should be given more flexibility in managing their network – in a way they should be allowed to assume the role of gatekeeper of the internet.

For ISPs, net neutrality is an obsolete and utopian idea. Facebook, which has grown into a mammoth internet platform since its inception in 2004, has recently joined this bandwagon. Under its Free Basics initiative (erstwhile internet.org), the internet giant provides toll free access to a set of websites (including Facebook obviously!) handpicked by itself to the users. In India so far it has partnered with Reliance Communications.

Facebook by far is the most audacious and aggressive proponent of ‘zero rating’ scheme. From lobbying the prime minister to giving back-to-back ads in television channels and two-page ads in national dailies to circulating a vaguely written letter in support of Free Basics on its social media site, Facebook is pitching for ‘digital equality’ by giving access to 'basic internet’ or say a slice of the internet.

Cautioning against zero rating, Prabir Purkayastha, chairperson, Society for Knowledge Commons, said the way zero-rating is being discussed, it seems Indians are only the consumers of internet, which is not true. “Indians are also the innovators on internet,” said Purkayastha. “Internet has given the innovators the right to connect to the users without having a huge amount of money. This is the character that will be destroyed if zero-rating will be implemented,” he says.

That’s true. Be it US-based Facebook or Google or Indian Flipkart or PayTm or SnapDeal, had it not been for open and neutral internet they wouldn’t have become what are today.

Raman Jit Singh Chima, global public policy director, Access Now, a New York-based firm working for digital rights, said the idea is to prevent a telco or an internet platform from assuming a role of a gatekeeper and control access. Misra, too, has written extensively on the counter-productiveness of zero rating: stifling of innovation and service providers loosing incentive to improve service and keep prices low. Both Misra and Chima testified their views on net neutrality to the standing committee on IT in August after the department of telecommunications submitted an expert committee report on the neutrality issue.

Whither public consultation

To formulate a regulation on how internet will shape up, the TRAI has come out with two consultation papers concerning net neutrality in the last nine months. The first consultation paper on ‘regulatory framework for over the top players (OTTs)’, which came in March, was written in favour of telecom and internet service providers. “It was embarrassing,” said Purkayastha. Over 1.2 million people wrote to the regulator. This was result of the savetheinternet.in campaign ran by free internet activists and lawyers, who were later joined by All India Bakchod (AIB) whose video on net neutrality went viral on YouTube (the video has received three million views in last eight months). This was unprecedented in the history of TRAI consultations. However, the fate of those responses is still unclear.

In December the regulator brought another paper. This time it was titled ‘regulation on differential pricing’. Contrary to the initial paper, this paper is far more objective and reasonable, said Nikhil Pahwa, founder, MediaNama portal and a key volunteer behind savetheinternet.in campaign. The regulator has sought comments on its second paper by December 30 and counter-comments by January 7. Till the time a final call is taken, the telecom regulator has instructed Reliance Communications, Facebook’s India telecom partner, to put Free Basics on hold.

The savetheinternet.in campaign has formulated the responses to the new consultation paper and has made it available for everyone favouring net neutrality to send it to the TRAI. The AIB team has released another video titled ‘Save the Internet - 2 – Judgement Day’, which has been viewed close to one million times in just four months.

The neutrality debate started in India in December 2014 when Airtel, country’s largest telco, announced – although it later backtracked – that the company would charge consumers more for using VOIP services, on top of the data charges. Later, it went on to launch Airtel Zero, wherein it struck deal with online services providers for user access at zero rate. Facebook had already introduced internet.org by then. While it was initially led by civil society, the debate was later joined by politicians – Naveen Patnaik, M Chandrashekhar, Jay Panda, Rahul Gandhi and Arvind Kejriwal – who strongly came out in support of net neutrality.

Facebook has termed its zero rating platform as a philanthropic activity intended to connect billions of unconnected population so that they can access education, health and employment related information. It has urged users to sign a petition, cautioning them against "a small, vocal group of critics" lobbying to prevent 1 billion people from accessing 'affordable internet'. Under Free Basics, Facebook claims, it doesn't charge app developers and includes them if they comply to its 'objective tech specs'.

Free Basics: A camouflage?

Critics, however, call it a walled garden. In providing free access to close to a hundred websites it continues to play the role of a gatekeeper. It is not the poor who decide what to access but Facebook! While it says that it is not making money out of Free Basics as it doesn't display ads in the Free Basics version of Facebook, it keeps the option of monetisation open in the future.

“It [Free Basics] has been camouflaged as charity," said a senior TRAI official, in an off the record conversation. While speaking to the Guardian on Facebook’s zero rating in December, Tim Berners Lee, founder of world wide web (www), said, “In the particular case of somebody who's offering... something which is branded internet, it's not internet, then you just say no. No it isn't free, no it isn't in the public domain, there are other ways of reducing the price of internet connectivity and giving something... [only] giving people data connectivity to part of the network deliberately, I think is a step backwards.”

Speaking in favour of zero rating, Payal Malik, associate professor, economics, Delhi University, said that it is wrong to assume that all consumers will get hooked to zero rated sites. “In a way you are saying that all humans have same preferences and likes and dislikes, which is very unlikely,” said Malik.

Experts representing telecom industry argue that the net neutrality regulation should be geography specific and the telecom players should be given more flexibility in dealing with the network. Mahesh Uppal, a senior telecom consultant and director, ComFirst India, while speaking at a round table discussion in Delhi, said that a majority of population in the West including countries opting for strict net neutrality – including Netherlands, Slovenia and the US – are already connected. "The data connectivity is primarily through fixed lines - copper, co-ax cable or optical fibre wired — wherein it is easier to add capacity to meet traffic growth. However this is difficult to do so for wireless networks," said Uppal. In developing countries, including India, mobile telephony and internet majorly runs on wireless. Hence, he argued, telecom and internet service providers should be given flexibility to zero rate. For Uppal, if zero rating or sponsored content is implemented properly “it can be one of the ways to scale up internet access” to the unconnected regions.

Neutrality proponents, however, differ. “It is basic economic theory, and zero rated sites get a price advantage. There are studies that show customers stay within the world of zero rated sites and never venture outside or are aware of the full internet,” professor Misra said.

Zero or equal rating?

So is there a middle ground? Are there ways to increase access without tampering with open and neutral character of the internet? Experts believe there are. Some of the solutions are not completely black and white, but in between. While there is a fierce opposition to zero rating, it might work, according to Sunil Abraham, executive director, centre for internet and society (CIS), if provided with an amount of equal rating (giving free data pack to users so that they can access any site or app they want).

Mozilla Foundation advocates equal rating. The foundation has sought to create such an alternative in Bangladesh and countries in Africa within the Firefox OS ecosystem. The foundation has tied up with telecom operator Grameenphone in Bangladesh to provide 20 Mb data per day for free to users, in exchange for viewing an advertisement. The model could be easily replicated in India, said Pahwa of MediaNama.

For African countries, the foundation has partnered with Orange. Both allow Africans to purchase $40 Firefox OS smartphones that come packaged with free three to six months of voice calling, text, and up to 500 Mb of monthly data. Purkayastha of Knowledge Commons said that zero-rating plan by telecom operators only makes sense when government services are provided for free through it. “That is the form of zero-rating I would support.”

There are a few platforms which are reimbursing data in megabytes to users accessing partnering apps. The user can then use the free data pack to access any other site or app. Some of them include: mCent, Gigato and DataMi. mCent, owned by Boston-based firm Jana, is a pioneer in this area. It is being used by 30 million users cross 98 countries. In India, according to Jana, one out of every 10 internet users has subscribed to mCent.

Yes, it does violate neutrality as it puts those app providers not having enough money at a disadvantageous position vis-à-vis to those having deep pocket to reimburse data to users. “I think it’s a grey area,” said professor Misra. On the surface it seems to be just like Free Basics, however, Gigato (or mCent) is making no pretense that what they are doing is philanthropy of increasing access, said professor Misra, adding that it is still acceptable as user will have the data to venture out of the walled garden. The senior TRAI official too finds it acceptable. “In my opinion, Facebook should become like Gigato,” he said.

If the regulator is going to protect consumers’ right and also not stifle startups and entrepreneurism, it will have to ensure some broad, core principles of the internet. It will have to prevent both the ISPs and the internet platforms from becoming gatekeepers. It must not allow any throttling, blocking, fast and slow lanes, discrimination based on price or quality of service and distortion of level playing field. How and whether TRAI is going to do these would be clear in a few months.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/governance-now-pratap-vikram-singh-and-taru-bhatia-january-6-2015-will-india-win-net-neutrality-battle

Will FASTag raise privacy concerns?

Shreya Nandi and Prathma Sharma — 2019-10-18T15:22:27Z

FASTag, an electronic device that enables direct, cashless toll payment, has been touted as the Aadhaar for vehicles as it would help the government track movement of automobiles. But the move can also stoke fresh concerns on privacy.

The article by Shreya Nandi and Prathma Sharma was published in Livemint on October 15, 2019. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

The device can track movement of vehicles, toll booth cameras can catch traffic law violations, prevent crime, and help authorities curb tax evasion.

While the movement of commercial vehicles will be tracked by revenue authorities by integrating with e-way bill system under Goods and Services Tax (GST) to curb revenue leakage, experts believe that tracking personal vehicle is a matter of concern.

It is not that the government will only use the stored data or video under limited and well-defined circumstances such as for evidence in case of traffic accidents, according to Pranesh Prakash, fellow, Centre for Internet Society.

“As transport minister Gadkari said (on Monday), the government will also use the video or data for any for analysis. And that will happen in a non-consensual manner, and outside the purview of a data protection framework, and without paying heed to the Supreme Court's landmark judgment on privacy," Prakash said.

On Monday, transport minister Nitin Gadkari said cameras at the toll booth will take photos of passengers in a vehicle, which will be useful for the home ministry as there will be a record of the vehicle’s movement.

FASTag, which comes into effect 1 December, uses radio frequency identification technology to enable direct toll payments from a moving vehicle. The toll fare is deducted from the bank account linked to FASTag. It will not only encourage cashless payments at toll plaza, but also decongest national highways, thereby ensuring seamless movement of vehicles, and reduce pollution and logistics cost.

Amid privacy concerns related to sharing Aadhaar details with banks, telecom companies or any other authority for fulfilling KYC norms, the Supreme Court had in September last year ruled that Aadhaar can only be used for welfare schemes and for delivering state subsidies. It had barred private companies from using Aadhaar data for authenticating customers.
Another expert said since FASTag data includes information that is personally identifiable with the vehicle owner, it can be misused if shared with various entities.
"With FASTag being linked with National Vehicle Database (Vahan database), it does raise privacy concerns, specially as Nitin Gadkari, the minister of road transport and highways, has admitted that the government has provided access to Vahan and Sarathi database to 32 government and 87 private entities for ₹65 crore till date," Salman Waris Managing Partner, TechLegis Advocates & Solicitors, said.

“With the Personal Data Protection Bill still in the making there are little regulatory measures to prevent or even punish FasTag data breaches," Waris said.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/livemint-shreya-nandi-prathma-sharma-october-15-2019-will-fastag-raise-privacy-concerns

Will Facebook, Twitter relocate servers to India?

praskrishna — 2016-04-23T15:26:39Z

The debate to relocate offshore servers of internet and social media firms including Google, Facebook and Twitter has revived.

The article by Taru Bhatia was published in Governance Now on April 23, 2016. Pranesh Prakash gave inputs.

Home minister Rajnath Singh has requested the social media companies, located outside India, to maintain servers in the country, in order to expedite the process of getting information on accounts which spread mischievous messages posing a threat to law and order situation. The move has come in the backdrop of delayed or no response to the government’s requests to these companies, for extracting information of some of its users on security grounds.

In February, the minister claimed Jamaat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed’s involvement in the anti-national slogans that were allegedly raised in the campus of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). The claim was based on a tweet that appeared on a fake twitter account of Saeed (@HafeezSaeedJUD), which was later deactivated by Twitter. But the US-based social media company has still not replied to the Indian government as to who was running the account.

It is interesting to note here that India shares mutual legal assistance treaty with the US, wherein, the duo can share information for the purpose of criminal investigation, via judicial route. The process, however, is lengthy.

“Given the nature of the content, sometimes the government cannot afford to wait. The process of issuing direction to get information or blocking certain content from public view is lengthy. The Indian government under the IT law is empowered to ask these companies to maintain servers in India,” says senior advocate, supreme court, and cyber law expert, Pavan Duggal, terming it as a legitimate concern related to national security. As India is a big market for all these companies, it shouldn’t be a problem for them to have servers in India, he says.

“If the police or security agencies want information from these companies, it becomes tall orders since they are not operating from India. They step back and say they are not accountable,” says Virag Gupta, a senior supreme court lawyer, adding that ministries of telecom and finance must join the home ministry in its request and spearhead the matter.

Gupta has filed a petition in the Delhi high court asking such offshore companies to register themselves under the Indian law. On the other hand, Pranesh Prakash, policy director at center for internet and society (CIS), a non-government research organisation supported by Google, feels that instead of requesting these companies to maintain servers in India, it is best for the government to figure out ways to speed up judicial process of the treaty, when it comes to internet governance.

From July to December 2015, India issued 141 requests to Twitter to retrieve information of its users’ accounts for criminal investigation purpose, as per the company’s transparency report. But the compliance rate was only 42 percent, the report says.

While India seeks information on national security grounds, the law here does not clearly define national security, which is still vast and ambiguous.

“I do believe that there is a need for a much clear definition of national security. If the government really wants to have servers of these companies in India then appropriate guidelines must exist, so that companies should not be taken by surprise,” says Duggal.

Security concerns

Data localisation is witnessing a growing trend among many countries. Last year, Russia enforced law to mandate internet companies to store its citizens’ data within the country. The move is generally taken in fear of losing country’s data to hackers. It also means that it would be easier for the government to get information from these internet companies.

And so protecting data and privacy of individuals within the country is also a matter of concern. Not having a strong data privacy law in place could lead to violation of internet rights of citizens.

“Privacy is a legitimate concern but at the end of the day the government is well empowered in the interest of protecting cyber security under the IT Act. But it is necessary for the government to look at the issue from a holistic perspective. There is a need for balancing privacy and security of an individual on one hand and national security on the other hand,” adds Duggal.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/governance-now-april-23-2016-taru-bhatia-will-facebook-twitter-relocate-servers-to-india

Will domain dot भारत spur the growth of Indian languages on the internet?

praskrishna — 2014-09-08T05:50:11Z

Modi's effort to promote the use of Hindi and e-governance has given hope to those who want to see more vernacular content online, but many challenges have to be overcome.

Rohan Venkataramakrishnan's blog post was published in Scroll.in on August 29, 2014. Sunil Abraham gave his inputs.

For most of its short history, the internet has been the English speaker’s playground. Though English is the world’s third-most spoken language (after Mandarin and Spanish), it is by far the most commonly used language on the internet. If you wanted to make sense of most of what’s on the World Wide Web, you had to be able to read and write English.

This is slowly changing. The launch of Devanagari script web addresses on Sunday, allowing people to use .भारत domain names, was another step in the slow effort to bring about a multilingual Web. Already, Indian languages like Hindi – one of the most commonly-spoken languages on Earth – lag far behind. The move gels well with the new government’s effort to promote the use of Hindi, and its push to increase digital services available to all citizens. The next few years could well see a spurt in vernacular content online.

But first many challenges have to be overcome. “At present, not a single Indian language figures in the top 10 languages prevalent on the Internet, though Chinese, Arabic and Russian feature in the list,” said a McKinsey report on the internet's impact on India. “The next wave of internet adoption in India will be dominated by local language speakers, which underscores the need for much more content and applications to be offered in local languages.”

Vernacular internet
Early studies of the internet attempted to quantify how much of the web was in English. A 1997 estimate put the number at 80% of all websites, while the Online Computer Library’s study in 2003 concluded that 72% of all online content was in English. Today that number is much lower.

W3Techs, which conducts surveys of the internet, now estimates that about 55% of content on the Internet is in English, followed by German, Russian and Japanese. Indian languages don’t crack the top 35.

The analysis is by its nature imprecise. The internet is vast and mostly uncharted. Estimates suggest search engines have indexed only 40% of Web content, leaving much off the mainstream radar. Measuring language becomes even harder because, in the early years, when fonts were harder to render, most non-English content on the internet was spelt out in Roman letters.

Indian Wiki
The rise of multilingual scripts has changed that, and made it easier to evaluate the diversity of the internet. Yet even the best approach relies more on sampling than measurement. There is one section of the Web, however, that does allow for comparisons of absolute numbers.

Relative to other tongues, Indian language-articles still comprise a minuscule portion of Wikipedia. English, Spanish and French are perhaps expected, but even languages like Vietnamese have nearly 10 times the number of pages that Hindi does. Waray-Waray, the fifth-most commonly spoken language in the Philippines, appears to be an outlier because of an automated translation method that creates pages in that language.

Hindi content has been growing on the internet encyclopedia, from no pages in 2003 to more than one lakh in 2011, but it still falls far behind the languages that are spoken as commonly as it, like Spanish and Arabic, let alone those with much smaller reach. Of course in many countries English is not spoken at all, so Internet users need web pages in their own language. In India, because of the language-class association, the majority of Internet users are at least conversant in English.

Obstacle Course
The impediments to further growth are all too apparent. For one, internet infrastructure still leaves much to be desired. Though India has the third-largest internet user-base in the world, only 10% of the country is actually online. Even by 2015, when internet access is expected to reach 28% of the population, the equivalent rural figure is likely to be just 9%, according to estimates.

“A lot of the core infrastructure that is necessary for language computing is missing,” said Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Centre for Internet & Society. “There’s no mandate by the government that these languages must be supported, no comprehensive dictionaries, no thesauri, no machine translation capabilities, no optical character recognition capabilities. Because our market is so insignificant for proprietary software makers, they haven’t done enough to develop these. Meanwhile, the free software community is too small and mostly English-speaking.”

The government has launched some initiatives in this regard, like a National Translation Mission aimed at machine translating text from English into Indic languages, as well as banks of fonts that are free to use. But Abraham said that while the government is clear this should be a priority area, it underestimates the scale of the problem.

“We need large scale investment by the government into each language,” he said. “We’re looking at maybe even Rs 100 crore per language, to bring each of our traditional languages into the internet age.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/scroll-in-rohan-venkataramakrishnan-will-domain-dot-bharat-spur-the-growth-of-Indian-languages-on-the-internet

Will Darjeeling Regain the Trust of Tourists?

Roshan Gupta — 2017-12-20T16:01:33Z

An agitation coupled with an internet ban that left tourists stranded, it looks like a tough time ahead for tourism in the Hills.

Darjeeling, West Bengal: The tourism industry in Darjeeling proved to be as crippled as most businesses operating from the town due to the agitation for a separate state of Gorkhaland. With the scenic beauty of the hills and the spectacular views it affords, Darjeeling has always been a major tourist attraction. A substantial part of the town’s employment is attributed to the tourism industry, which took a bloody blow with the ban on internet services that eventually lasted a hundred days.

“The bookings for Darjeeling generally commence four months prior to the annual Hindu festival Durga Puja (usually in September or October), but this time most of the enquiries were for Sikkim. The Hills usually see huge footfall during Puja, but the unrest hit tourism badly and we incurred huge losses,” says Samrat Sanyal, a tour operator.

The tourist season generally starts around April and continues till late October. That the internet shutdown came right in the middle of this period — it was first announced on June 18 and lasted till late September — did not help matters. Sanyal says that in 2016 around 85% of the tourist footfall took place around the time of Durga Puja, but in 2017 it had fallen to around 5-10%. Though things have relatively calmed down, Sanyal believes the flow of international tourists will remain low for a while. Other tour operators this reporter spoke to also echoed Sanyal’s sentiments and said that the aftermath has left tourists with little confidence in the Hills.

Sources in the tourism department say that apart from the internet shutdown, a general response to the strikes and the violence attributed to the agitation played a major role in “maginalising tourist flow”. The tourists who came to the Hills around the time the agitation intensified could not even get in touch with their families as the mobile reception was poor for days, besides no web connectivity. Many who had already arrived at Darjeeling had to cut short their vacation.

One of them was Kartik Lodha. A tourist from Rajasthan, Lodha was caught unawares by the strike that came just as he prepared to go paragliding in Delo. He had no choice but to return to his hotel midway. With no internet to assist him in looking for a way out, Lodha left Kalimpong the next morning in a state bus with police escort. "It’s the locals who suffer the most during such situations. They are the ones who will have to deal with these problems and difficulties in the long run. Barring a missed vacation, we will be fine," said Lodha.

Blaming the state for imposing the shutdown and creating “unwanted problems” in the Hills, Tapash Mitra, a tourist from Kolkata, said that "the West Bengal government is hindering its own tourism industry”. He had planned a three-day trip with his family, but had to return on the day of his arrival. "I just want the people to have peace in the Hills."

Homestays were also badly hit and saw a spate of booking cancellations in the wake of the agitation and the subsequent network shutdown. Nimlamhu, the owner of Green-Hills homestay at Sangsay, said that more than the owners of hotels or homestays, tourists suffered as they were left stranded, unsure of what they would have to do. “Nothing works when the internet is banned. Even refunds cannot be processed.”

When asked about the arrangements that were eventually made to refund the tourists’ money, he said, "The amount was refunded because we were left with no option, and for those guests who were our regular customers, we adjusted the balance with their future bookings."

He said, however, that it was difficult to contact those who booked stays in advance but were hit with the news of the strike before they arrived there. "There was no way we could contact the guests as the internet was banned. About 50-60% of our bookings are done online and we couldn’t even refund their money through netbanking. We had to personally call them up and apologise for the unforeseen circumstance, and request hem to bear with us, not knowing that the strike would last as long as it did," said Nimlamhu.

Sweta Neriah, who is in charge of Palighar, a homestay in Ecchay, was preparing their promotions when the town was hit with the blanket-ban on internet. "For international guests we have a system where payment is done only during checkout. We did incur heavy losses this season and I’m sure we will feel the impact of this slump for some years. Incidentally, this happened just when the international tourist flow started to pick up in this part of the world."

Complaining that the internet ban cost them a year’s business, Kabir Pradhan, the owner of the homestay, said, "Internet is the only way to really promote a business these days. We need to keep updating out official pages on every social networking site to market it. Only then can we attract clients and agents."
He now looks forward to the spring season.

Meanwhile, many tour guides say they suffered huge losses with the internet ban and dip in the number of tourists. Manisha Sharma, who used to work as a tour guide, says she regrets being in the hills as the ban robbed her of three months’ income. “Had I not been here, I could have travelled to some other places with tourists, but the movement of vehicles was also restricted during the agitation, leaving me broke and with few options,” says Sharma.

Roshan Gupta is a Siliguri-based journalist and a member of 101Reporters.com, a pan-India network of grassroots reporters.

Shutdown stories are the output of a collaboration between 101 Reporters and CIS with support from Facebook.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/will-darjeeling-regain-the-trust-of-tourists

Will Aadhaar leaks be used as an excuse to shut out scrutiny of welfare schemes?

Anumeha Yadav — 2017-05-20T07:09:51Z

Aadhaar data of all 23 crore beneficiaries of Direct Benefit Transfer schemes could be publicly available, says a report by Centre for Internet and Society.

The blog post by Anumeha Yadav was published on Scroll on May 20, 2017.

In the past three months, there have been several reports about caches of Aadhaar data being publicly displayed on government websites across the country.

Personal information associated with the biometric-based 12-digit unique identification number, which the government wants every Indian resident to have, is mandated to be confidential under the Aadhaar Act, 2016.

But exactly how much Aadhaar data has been compromised by negligent government departments?

On May 2, researchers at the non-profit Centre for Internet and Society released a comprehensive report on the extent of the data breaches. They documented four government portals using Aadhaar for making payments and found that sensitive personal and financial information of nearly 13 crore people was being displayed on them, including details of about 10 crore bank accounts.

Two of the portals, for the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act and the National Social Assistance Programme, belong to the Union rural development ministry. The others are run by the Andhra Pradesh government for the workers’ insurance scheme Chandranna Bima and for filing Daily Online Payment Reports of MNREGA.

The researchers estimated that Aadhaar data of all 23 crore beneficiaries of the central government’s various Direct Benefit Transfer schemes could be publicly available. This means nearly a fifth of India’s population is potentially exposed to irreversible privacy harm, and financial and identity fraud.

The Unique Identification Authority of India, the agency which manages the Aadhaar database, however, and had earlier denied any breach of confidential data, has now reportedly said that such a data leak could only be the result of a potentially illegal hack attack and asked CIS to provide details of the persons involved in the data theft.

The rural development ministry, on its part, has changed how its MNREGA database is accessed, redacting Aadhaar numbers and bank account details of the beneficiaries. Senior officials of the ministry, however, denied making systemic changes in the wake of the Centre for Internet and Society report.

“The researchers claimed that financial information of over 10 crore individuals was available publicly, on pension and MNREGA portals,” said Nagesh Singh, additional secretary in the ministry, “but bank account details were displayed only on two state department websites of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana as these states are far advanced in transparency practices.”

“For all other states,” Singh added, “financial information and Aadhaar numbers were removed or masked last year. For pension schemes we masked the data in June 2016, and for MNREGA this data was removed in December. Even if any data was showing, it would only be for the particular block the resident is in, not for any other state workers.”

All this was done, he said, “because the UIDAI communicated to us that this information is sensitive and should not be displayed and the Aadhaar regulations prohibit display of Aadhaar numbers”. The Aadhaar (Sharing of Information) Regulations were introduced last September.

Contrary to Singh’s claims, social activists outside Andhra Pradesh and Telangana confirmed they could access bank account details of MNREGA workers until May 3. Only on May 4, two days after the Centre for Internet and Society report was released, did the details stop showing on the Management Information System.

“We could no longer access the electronic muster roll, and it started returning error messages,” said Ashish Ranjan of Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan, a registered union of unorganised workers in Araria, Bihar. But until early May, he added, the Management Information System allowed anyone in any state to access the personal information of workers, even from other states.

Activists and beneficiaries relied on this system for two things. “Several of the new bank accounts have errors, and accessing this information directly helped get the discrepancies corrected without going to block level officials,” Ranjan explained. “It also helped track where the wages of workers were stuck.”

When activists asked why the data was no longer accessible, Ranjan said, rural development department officials said the Management Information System was changed “on the directions of the Supreme Court and the Union cabinet secretary.”

“This has been the pattern with the MNREGA MIS for long,” Ranjan said, referring to the information system. “Senior officials change access to a feature as they wish without clear processes or explanations.”

James Herenj, an activist with NREGA Watch, a non-profit which monitors the implementation of MNREGA in Jharkhand, had the same experience. “Bank account details were removed from the website last week,” he said, “this is a problem as we can no longer help MNREGA workers get data entry errors corrected.”

The Centre for Internet and Society researchers too contested the rural development ministry’s claim that Aadhaar numbers and bank account details were displayed only on Andhra Pradesh and Telangana government websites. They released a video clip showing them accessing bank account details and Aadhaar numbers of 801 MNREGA workers of Agara panchayat in Bengaluru through an internet search on March 25.

Screenshot of a Chandigarh Union Territory website displaying Aadhaar information.

Consent, please?

The Aadhaar Act, 2016 requires both government and private agencies to take informed consent before using a person’s Aadhaar for authentication, but there is little evidence that consent is sought before Aadhaar is seeded with personal and financial information.

Indeed, when the Supreme Court first permitted the voluntary use of Aadhaar for MNREGA in October 2015, Aadhaar numbers of 2.36 crore workers had already been seeded to their bank accounts, without the consent of over 99% of them.

The rural development ministry’s data shows that until June 2016, only about 4,10,000, or less than 1% of the 10.7 crore MNREGA workers, had agreed to Aadhaar-based payments. The ministry worked around this by organising “consent camps” to retrospectively collect proof of consent.

Poor standards

Writing in The Economic Times, Ram Sewak Sharma, chairperson of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and former director general of the Unique Identification Authority of India, argued that the reports about “Aadhaar leaks” on government websites failed to account for provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Section 4 of this law provides for proactive disclosure of government decisions while Section 8 mandates public authorities to publish all information on welfare schemes, including details of beneficiaries.

This has created a situation, Sharma pointed out, where the transparency law may require even Aadhaar numbers of beneficiaries to be made public even though the Aadhaar Act mandates them to be confidential.

Right to Information activists, however, said the authorities were anything but devoted to the transparency law. Crucial information they seek on the efficacy of Aadhaar in welfare schemes is routinely denied.

“The government is willfully manipulating information systems to subvert details of biometric failures,” said Amrita Johri, a member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information and an activist with the Right to Food campaign, which has petitioned the Delhi High Court against Aadhaar being mandatory for food rations. “We have come across instances of ration cardholders being turned back because of fingerprints being falsely rejected, or network failure, but on the Delhi government’s website, this is shown as the beneficiaries not having come to the ration shop at all.”

“Similarly, the government claims it has removed bogus ration cards through Aadhaar,” Johri added, “but they do not show any administrative action if such bogus cards were really found through Aadhaar even though Section 4 of the RTI Act requires disclosure of such decisions.”

Jharkhand Directorate of Social Security displayed Aadhaar numbers, bank accounts numbers and transaction details of over 15 lakh pensioners.

Johri is concerned that the “Aadhaar leaks” could become an excuse to deny people “other useful information”. “When we requested officials to display how many biometric transaction were not successful, they told us that in a few days, they will remove the entire MIS as there had received orders from the food ministry to not display demographic data associated with Aadhaar,” she said. “But we pointed out that it was the creation of a single identification number that is the problem. Why should information on all other government schemes be removed?”

The Centre for Internet and Society report points out that while the law now makes Aadhaar numbers confidential, the government has failed to specify data masking standards. Section 6 of the Aadhaar Regulations lays down that no government or private agency should publish Aadhaar numbers unless they are redacted or blacked out “through appropriate means”.

But this is too vague, the report points out. “In some instances, the first four digits are masked while in others the middle digits are masked,” Srinivas Kodali, one of the authors of the report, explained, “which means someone with access to different databases can use tools for aggregation to reconstruct information hidden or masked in a particular database.”

Kodali said that for information other than Aadhaar numbers, each ministry and department is required to classify the data that is sensitive, restricted or open, which they have failed to do. “The National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy, 2012 requires securing information of sensitive and restricted data but it does not recommend the ways to do it,” he said. “The standards around information disclosure and control do not exist, and the Ministry of Statistics expert committee on this was unable to suggest one last month.”

“Even for MNREGA data,” Kodali continued, “the Ministry of Rural Development’s chief data officer should have classified the financial information as restricted or open when the database was first created. But did they do this.”

Nagesh Singh, the additional secretary, however said his ministry “does not have a chief data officer to do this”. “The ministry’s economic advisor is the official responsible for categorising data and advises us on this,” he added.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/scroll-may-20-2017-anumeha-yadav-will-aadhaar-leaks-be-used-as-an-excuse-to-shut-out-scrutiny-of-welfare-schemes

Will Aadhaar Act Address India’s Dire Need For a Privacy Law?

nehaa — 2016-04-05T16:01:06Z

The article was published by Quint on March 31, 2016.

The passage of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 (will hereby be referred to as “the Act”) has led to flak for the government from privacy advocates, academia and civil society, to name a few.

To my mind, the opposition deserves its fair share of criticism (lacking so far), for its absolute failure to engage with and act as a check on the government in the passage of the Act, and the events leading up to it.

The government’s introduction of the Act as a ‘money bill’ under Article 110 of the Constitution of India (“this/the Article”) is a mockery of the constitutional process. It renders redundant, the role of the Rajya Sabha as a check on the functioning of the Lower House.

Article 110 limits a ‘money bill’ only to six specific instances: covering tax, the government’s financial obligations and, receipts and payments to and from the Consolidated Fund of India, and, connected matters.

The Act lies well outside the confines of the Article; the government’s action may attract the attention of the courts.

Political One-Upmanship


Finance Minister Arun Jaitley (left) listens to Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Governor Raghuram Rajan. (Photo: Reuters)

In the past, the Supreme Court (“the Court”) has stepped into the domain of the Parliament or the Executive when there was a complete and utter disregard for India’s constitutional scheme. In recent constitutional history, this is perhaps most noticeable in the anti-defection cases, (beginning with Kihoto Hollohan in 1992); and, in the SR Bommai case in 1994, on the imposition of the President’s rule in states.

In hindsight, although India has benefited from the Court’s action in the Bommai and Hollohan cases, it is unlikely that the passage of the Aadhaar Act as a ‘money bill’, reprehensible as it is, meets the threshold required for the Court’s intervention in Parliamentary procedure.

Besides, the manner of its passage, the Act warrants

Censure for its process
Its (in)compatibility with fundamental rights
The failure to incorporate the suggestions of the Yashwant Sinha-led Standing Committee to UPA’s NIDAI Bill
The possibility of surveillance that it presents
The lack of measures to protect personal information
Its inadequate privacy safeguards
The questions around the realisation of its stated purpose.

Instead, a part of the Aadhaar debate has involved political one-upmanship between the Congress and the BJP, pitting the former’s NIDAI Bill against the latter’s Aadhaar Act.

While an academic comparison between the two is welcome, its use as a tool for political supremacy would be laughable, were it not deeply problematic, given the many serious concerns highlighted above.

Better Than UPA Bill?


The Act may have more privacy safeguards than the earlier UPA Bill. (Photo: iStockphoto)

And while the Act may have more privacy safeguards than the earlier UPA Bill, critics have argued that they not up to the international standard, and instead, that they are plagued by opacity.

Additionally, despite claims that the Act is a significant improvement over the UPA Bill, it fails to address concerns, including around the centralised storage of information, that were raised by civil society members and others.

Perhaps most problematically, however, the Act takes away an individual’s control of her own information. Subsidies, government benefits and services are linked to the mandatory possession of an Aadhar number (Section 7 of the Act), effectively negating the ‘freedom’ of voluntary enrollment (Section 3 of the Act). This directly contradicts the recommendations of the Justice AP Shah Committee, before whom the Unique Identification Authority of India had earlier stated that enrollment in Aadhaar was voluntary.

To make matters worse, the individual does not have the authority to correct, modify or alter her information; this lies, instead, with the UIDAI alone (Section 31 of the Act). And the sharing of such personal information does not require a court order in all cases.


Kanhaiya Kumar speaking in JNU on 3 March 2016. (Photo: PTI)

It may be authorised by Executive authorities under the vague, ill-understood concept of ‘national security’, (Section 33(2) of the Act) which the Act does not define. We would do well to learn the dangers of leaving ‘national security’ open to interpretation, in the aftermath of the recent events at JNU.

These recent events around Aadhaar have only underscored the dire urgency for comprehensive privacy legislation in India and, the need to overhaul our data protection laws to meet our constitutional commitments along with international standards.

Meanwhile, constitutional challenges to the Aadhaar scheme are currently pending in the Supreme Court. The Court’s verdict may well decide the future of the Aadhaar Act, with the stage already set for a constitutional challenge to the legislation. The BJP’s victory in this case may be short-lived.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-quint-march-31-2016-nehaa-chaudhari-will-aadhaar-act-address-indias-dire-need-for-a-privacy-law

Wie die chinesische Mega-App TikTok Indiens Wahlkampf beeinflussen könnte

praskrishna — 2019-03-20T15:20:12Z

Die chinesische Kurzvideo-App Tiktok gehört zu den wertvollsten Start-ups der Welt – und sie wird zunehmend politisch. In Indien weckt das Ängste.

The article by Frederic Spohr was published in Handelsblatt on March 13, 2019. Shweta Mohandas was quoted.

Angela Merkel spricht Hindi, zumindest auf der chinesischen Social-Media-App TikTok. In einem Satire-Video steht die Bundeskanzlerin neben dem indischen Premierminister Narendra Modi – und erklärt dem indischen Regierungschef, dass sie ihn gerne heiraten und mit ihm für immer zusammenleben will. Das sagt Merkels indische Synchronstimme. Die App TikTok, mit der Nutzer selbst gedrehte oder bearbeitete Kurzvideos teilen, ist die derzeit wohl erfolgreichste App der Welt. Das dahinter stehende Start-up Bytedance wird mit umgerechnet 66 Milliarden Euro so hoch bewertet ist wie kein anderes junges Unternehmen. Indien ist dabei der mittlerweile wichtigste Auslandsmarkt für die Chinesen. Mehr als 250 Millionen Inder haben die App bereits heruntergeladen. Monatlich kommen Dutzende weitere Millionen dazu.

Doch der Erfolg der chinesischen App hat auch Ängste geweckt. Ab dem 11. April wird auf dem Subkontinent ein neues Parlament gewählt – und wie in vielen anderen Ländern wächst in Indien die Sorge, dass über Social-Media-Plattformen Wahlen manipuliert werden, zum Beispiel weil darüber Falschnachrichten verbreitet, geheime Wählerprofile angelegt oder die Plattformen für Spionage genutzt werden könnten. Das gilt nun nicht mehr nur für Facebook oder Twitter, sondern auch für TikTok – und wegen seiner chinesischen Herkunft vielleicht insbesondere dafür.

Dass TikTok aus China kommt, ist problematisch, weil es bezüglich Datensammlung und -verarbeitung weniger transparent als andere Social-Media-Apps ist“, sagt Shweta Mohandas, Politik-Beauftragte beim Centre for Internet and Society (Cis) in Bangalore.

Der Subkontinent wird so zu einem Testfall für die wachsende politische Bedeutung chinesischer Social-Media-Apps im Ausland. TikTok ist auch in Amerika und Europa bereits weit verbreitet – und hat bereits Kritiker alarmiert. „Die Reichweite dieser Apps zu ignorieren, wäre ein fataler Fehler“, warnt Claudia Biancotti, leitender Ökonom am amerikanischen Thinktank Peterson Institute for International Economics in einem Blogbeitrag über TikTok.

Für Biancotti ist der Umgang mit chinesischen Social-Media-Apps von ähnlich großer Bedeutung wie der Umgang mit dem chinesischen Mobilfunkausrüster Huawei. „Die Tiefe der gesammelten Nutzerdaten machen sie zu sehr wirksamen Instrumenten sowohl für die Spionage als auch für die Manipulation der öffentlichen Meinung.“ Fünf der zehn beliebtesten Apps im indischen Android-Appstore kamen 2018 bereits aus China.

Anzahl politischer Videos nimmt zu

TikTok wirkt vollkommen unpolitisch. Wie in Deutschland überwiegen auch in Indien kurzweilige Witzvideos und private Videoclips. Die meisten Inhalte auf der App sind Musikvideos von Jugendlichen, die mit Effekten aufgehübscht werden. Auch das Merkel-Video ist kein Manipulationsversuch und dürfte für die meisten als klare Satire erkennbar sein.

Doch die Anzahl politischer Videos auf TikTok hat in Indien vor den Wahlen stark zugenommen: Viele junge Menschen erklären beispielsweise, warum sie welchen Politiker wählen werden. Videos mit dem Hashtag NarendraModi wurden fast 30 Millionen mal angesehen, Clips zu seinem Herausforderer Rahul Gandhi wurden rund 12 Millionen Mal angeguckt.

Viele junge Menschen verwenden TikTok und soziale Medien, um mit der Welt zu kommunizieren. Die politischen Parteien haben das erkannt und versuchen, auf die Erstwähler Eindruck zu machen“, sagt Cis-Expertin Mohandas.

Besonders beliebt ist die App auf dem Land. In der Provinz leben die meisten Inder, gleichzeitig ist hier der Bildungsstandard besonders gering. Diese Zielgruppe dürfte am einfachsten zu manipulieren sein.

Subtile Beeinflussung möglich

Eine Beeinflussung könnte theoretisch so subtil verlaufen, dass sie kaum zu überprüfen ist. Möglich wäre beispielsweise ein Szenario, bei dem auf Druck der chinesischen Regierung die Algorithmen so geändert werden, dass Nutzer bestimmte Inhalte verstärkt gezeigt bekommen – oder dass unliebsame Inhalte überhaupt nicht angezeigt werden. In China selbst filtert die heimische App WeChat bereits kritische Inhalte heraus, ohne Sender oder Empfänger zu benachrichtigen.

Wie in Deutschland wurde in Indien bisher bezüglich TikTok vor allem über den Schutz der Privatsphäre von Kindern gesprochen. Die Jugendlichen präsentieren sich in den Videos oft in freizügigen Posen, die Pädophile anlocken könnten. Die generelle Datenschutzproblematik aufgrund des chinesischen Ursprungs des Unternehmens und die mögliche Verbreitung von Falschnachrichten gerät nun aber immer stärker in den Fokus.

Das indische IT-Ministerium kündigte bereits im Februar eine stärkere Regulierung der Social-Media-Apps an. Einflussreiche Hindu-Nationalisten haben sich sogar für ein Verbot der chinesischen Apps ausgesprochen. Die Angriffe dürften dabei auch wirtschaftliche Hintergründe haben: Angesichts der chinesischen und amerikanischen Dominanz geraten indische Konkurrenzangebote immer stärker ins Hintertreffen.

TikTok selbst wehrt sich vehement gegen die Vorwürfe. Es verweist darauf, sich an alle aktuellen Gesetze zu halten und die Inhalte auf der Plattform in zahlreichen Landessprachen zu überwachen. „Die Privatsphäre und Sicherheit unserer Benutzer hat für TikTok höchste Priorität, und wir halten uns an die lokalen Gesetze und Vorschriften in den Märkten, in denen wir tätig sind“, teilt das Unternehmen dem Handelsblatt mit. „TikTok-Benutzerdaten werden in den USA und anderen Märkten, in denen TikTok über branchenführende Rechenzentren von Drittanbietern tätig ist, gespeichert und verarbeitet.“

Rückendeckung bekommt das Unternehmen von der chinesischen Regierung. In einem Artikel der englischsprachigen Parteizeitung „Global Times“ heißt es, TikTok werde von Amerika wie Huawei als Sicherheitsrisiko dargestellt, um Chinas technologischen Aufstieg zu verhindern. TikTok sei nur eine „Unterhaltungs-App für Menschen auf der ganzen Welt, die Spaß und Entspannung wollen“.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/handelsblatt-frederic-spohr-march-13-2019-wahlkampf-beeinflussung-wie-die-chinesische-mega-app-tiktok-indiens-wahlkampf-beeinflussen-koennte

Why your Facebook Stalker is Not the Real Problem

nishant — 2012-03-21T05:02:16Z

We live in networked conditions. This is a statement that can now be taken at face-value, and immediately explains our highly connected, inter-meshed environments finds Nishant Shah in this article published in FirstPost on March 20, 2012.

Especially within the digital world, the World Wide Web has become synonymous with social networking systems, where increasingly all our access, communication and interaction is located within a series of interconnected networks.

From the imagination of the web as a complex network, we have evolved to looking at the web as facilitating networks where different relationships, transactions and connections can be mapped and managed. This is why we often have romantic imaginations of networks as free, open, collaborative, shared spaces of interaction and expression.

However, we have reached a stage where this idea of a network as a liberatory space is under threat. Even as I write this, Internet Service Providers are now planning to set up sophisticated, automated systems that will do a deep-spy on your data transfer to see if you are sharing files (sometimes also called piracy) using the Internet.

These systems will now keep track of all your digital transactions and will monitor what you consume, who you talk to and determine whether you are a good ethical subject who is only using the Internet in ways that the powers to be want you to.

For me, this particular networked condition of being constantly monitored and watched is scary. And it surprises me that this invasive process is less in public attention than Google’s recently changed privacy policies or the TOS-in-progress nature of privacy on Facebook.

This is because the ubiquitous presences of networks in our lives have made them transparent to us – we do not think of the networks themselves as entities but as spaces where interactions with other objects is possible. Hence, if I ask you, right now, to name the top 5 entities that you interact with the most on Facebook, I am sure you will be able to name them. More probably than not, these top 5 entities with people that you have formed strong Facebook Friendships with.

In fact there are platforms designed to let you know who you are talking with most on your networks. Network influence measurement indices by services like Klout are able to tell you not only who you talk to but also what are your key areas of influence. This is a way by which the network becomes invisible to us. It hides the fact that the thing that talks to you the most on Facebook is Facebook itself.

The marketing of Facebook might tell you that you are talking to other human beings, but reality is that the network is more than the sum total of all human beings on the system. Just look at the amount of information Facebook produces on your behalf and to you. Notifications for adding friends, for liking people, for people writing to you, for people commenting on your walls and posts, form more than 50% of the information traffic on Facebook or social networking systems.

This information is produces and shared by scripts, coded bots, algorithmic applications, and non-human entities that not only support and sustain the network but are also significant members of the networks.

This is the actual networked condition – where the processes and entities that make the networks possible, produce an illusion of seamless communication and interaction, while performing and extraordinary amount of information and for you.

This blindness to our own ‘networkedness’ has crucial ramifications for our online activities because it makes us oblivious to questions of privacy, control, safety and trust. We have privacy settings to protect us from human entities on Facebook. There is very little concern about the non-human entities who store, distribute and use the data that we produce. If we don’t even know what these watchers are, how do we protect ourselves from being watched? What happens when between you and your ‘friend’, is a series of silent interceptors who are recording and using your data without your knowledge?

Being in a network is like being in a glass-house. We cannot see the walls and hence, we presume that we need our privacy from the other inhabitants of the same house. However, in that, we forget that the walls are watching, and that there are invisible watchers beyond the walls, who are in control.

It is time to make our networks visible again. It is time to realise that what we really need to be afraid of, on social networking systems, is the social network itself, and not the mythical stranger who wants to stalk us or that unwanted friend you want to exclude from your information sharing.

Privacy and safety are not merely compromised at the interface, where information might leak and travel into zones outside of your knowledge and control. The real questions of being safe are actually in the protocols and designs of the network itself.

We need to start looking at larger invasive policies exercises by the different invisible actors like the ISP, ICT ministries, corporate policies, design choices and architecture of interception that sustain the networks we so gladly embrace.

Nishant Shah is Director-Research at the Bangalore based Centre for Internet and Society and recently edited a 4 volume book on youth, technology and change, titled ‘Digital AlterNatives with a Cause?’

Read this in FirstPost

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/facebook-stalker-is-not-real-problem

Why you should keep a close eye on the net neutrality debate in the US

Admin — 2018-01-18T14:50:52Z

As the United State's FCC Chairman Ajit Pai gears up to repeal the net neutrality laws put in place in 2015, India should sit up and take note.

The blog post by Subhrojit Mallick was published by Digital.in on November 24, 2017.

Back in 2014, a group of Redditors started debating net neutrality in India after Airtel announced it would charge extra for Voice Over IP (VoIP) services like Skype. Soon, that snowballed into a nation-wide campaign with over a million internet users participating. Things didn’t help when Facebook too wanted to provide a bunch of internet services for free in India through its Internet.org or Free Basics initiative. However, a year-long discussion and public outrage against the two, led the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to rule in favour of net neutrality and stop both Airtel and Facebook in their tracks of violating a free and open internet.

Fast forward three years down the line and America, the birthplace of the internet, is struggling with the problem of internet freedom. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under the Donald Trump Administration led by Chairman Ajit Pai submitted a final draft proposal yesterday to repeal the existing net neutrality laws put in force by the Obama administration in 2015. The draft proposal will be voted upon by FCC by the end of the year and considering the FCC has a Republican majority under Ajit Pai, the proposal is likely to pass.

What is FCC chairman Ajit Pai doing?

The draft removes almost every net neutrality rule from 2015, making ISPs the gatekeepers of the internet. It states internet providers will have the freedom to implement fast and slow speed lanes, prioritise traffic and block apps and services. The only rule they have to follow -- publicly disclose when they are doing any of the things stated above.

Executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, Sunil Abraham elaborated on what's on Pai's mind.

"Ajit Pai's ideology is pro-market. He believes the market will sort all problems out. According to Pai, the magic of competition will eliminate all the harms emerging from net neutrality violation," he said.

"Pai has said, you do what you want to do, but you have to disclose that to the public. You can block, throttle, have fast lanes, prioritise traffic, have discriminatory pricing, but you disclose them. If the customer doesn't like it, he can swith to another network. Pai believes the transparency requirements will allow the magic of the market to diminish and eliminate harm. His regulation of net neutrality is transparency," Abraham further added.

However, such a move will have drastic effects on the free flow of internet traffic. Telecom companies and ISPs can handpick services by charging customers to access some sites or by slowing down the speeds of others. For instance, ISPs can make consumers pay more to watch high-quality content on Netflix.

With net neutrality rules repealed, the internet will become a pay-to-play service. It will essentially divide the internet into fast and slow lanes. One will be a speedy service that could be priced higher and another, much slower and cheaper. While big players like Amazon, Facebook, Google, Netflix and the likes can easily pay the higher fees and stay unfettered, newcomers and smaller players will have it tough. Although, the move will lead to cuts in profits for everyone. A higher price to consumers will eat into the user base of these companies, while startups and new voices in the media will find entry and success prohibitive.

Although it’s true that no single ISP in the US has the entire market to itself and the market is indeed divided into a handful of players, they do operate in a de facto monopolised way. How? ISPs in the US have sliced up the entire country into areas such that users in a particular area have only one choice of service provider. That essentially leaves users at the mercy of whatever Comcast or Spectrum is offering (or not offering).

By putting the net neutrality rules in place in 2015, the US had ensured these ISPs won’t do anything grossly uncompetitive. The current rules make broadband in the country a public utility, same as electricity. And now, Ajit Pai-led FCC is about to repeal those very rules that kept them grounded.

Will the FCC ruling make apps and services expensive in other countries?

While Pai’s jurisdiction does not extend beyond the United States, his tirades against a free internet will most definitely have rippling effects across the world. More importantly, it will raise the cost of operations of companies like Netflix and Amazon who will have to hire legal experts and lobbyists to negotiate deals with service providers. That extra cost will be burdened on the US consumers of course, but since they have a large international presence, it is likely that the extra cost will trickle down to users outside the US as well.

And that’s not just the streaming companies. All the tech giants hail from the US and it is only logical that a rise in their costs of operation will have an impact on their global operations.

Although, if the level playing field in the US is disrupted, companies will look for greener pastures and if that means moving out of the US to other countries, it could happen.

How will FCC’s decision impact India?

While US is grappling with such a reality, Indians fought against it and won. Or did they? Last year, after Airtel and Facebook were asked to drop their plans for differential pricing, TRAI released a paper on net neutrality and differential pricingto finalise its views on the matter. The regulatory body released a 14-question long consultation paper seeking comments on internet traffic management from the public.

“Increasingly, concerns have been raised globally relating to discriminatory treatment of Internet traffic by access providers. These concerns relating to nondiscriminatory access have become the centre of a global policy debate. The purpose of this second stage of consultation is to proceed towards the formulation of final views on policy or regulatory interventions, where required, on the subject of NN,” the paper read.

“Net Neutrality being repealed in the US will hurt innovation in that country, and will lead to a consolidation of power with those Internet companies which have the money to partner with US carriers. This hurts Indian product startups, because it means that their apps may not be as easily available to users in the US. The Internet is one world, and we need the same Internet to be available everywhere, across the world: one Internet for the entire world,” Nikhil Pahwa, Co-Founder of Internet Freedom Foundation told Digit.

That means, essentially, the debate on net neutrality is not over in India. In fact, both RS Sharma, the Chairman of TRAI and FCC’s Ajit Pai agree on the need to bridge the digital divide. Both are exploring ways to keep the internet open while providing access to the unconnected. Thankfully, both differs on the approach to meet that goal.

Pai believes the internet should be left unregulated despite the “hypothetical harms” to the consumer. He thinks the current rules were put in place to avoid theoretical harms which were not based on hard evidence. Pai claims there should be evidence-based regulation of the internet.

Sharma, in contrast, disagrees on an evidence-based approach.

“The TRAI's view of Net Neutrality has so far been diametrically opposite to Ajit Pai's FCC, and with good reason. Net Neutrality ensures that all ISPs and telecom operators act as exchanges of data between users, and do not discriminate on the basis of the type or source of that data. This allows for permission-less innovation on the Internet, which has given us the Internet that we have today,” Pahwa added.

Will India’s stance on net neutrality change after the FCC’s decision?

Rajan Mathews, Director General of Cellular Operators Association of India believes the FCC’s decision will no doubt have some impact on the path India takes.

“I think the policymakers will look at the decision the US makes. They had taken their decision as a point of reference before and the FCC’s ruling is too large an issue to not look at it. Both the DoT (Department of Telecom) and TRAI will have to reevaluate their approach in the context of the what happens in the US,” he said.

“Net neutrality approach in both countries is still in flux and India is going to tread lightly on net neutrality issues,” he added. As per Mathews, in India, the situation is different from the US where a handful of telecom companies and ISPs wield control of the entire country. In India, there is a licensed environment which provides a minimal standard of net neutrality, which is applied across the board and everybody who is providing a similar service is made to follow similar guidelines.

However, Mathews did attribute India’s efforts to enforce net neutrality to the United States’ efforts to place the rules in the first place in 2015 under the Obama administration, when internet was deemed as a public utility, same as electricity or telephone.

“Net neutrality in India emerged from the US definition. Now that they are going to repeal it, people in India who were looking at the US as a model will evaluate the implications of the move,” Mathews elaborated.

The US is looking to implement an ex-post approach to regulating the internet wherein the ISPs and telcos will adopt a free market approach and will only be investigated if they violate a rule. India, Mathews says, is adopting an ex-ante approach where there will be some commonly accepted criteria of net neutrality, but operators will have the ability to manage their traffic to ensure quality of service.

Minister of Information and Broadcasting, Ravi Shankar Prasad also helped alleviate fears of India following suit. During the Global Summit for Cyberspace Security held yesterday, he said, "The citizens' right of accessing the internet is "non-negotiable" and the government will not allow any company to restrict people's entry to the worldwide web."

Prime Minister Narendra Modi also came in support of net neutrality in India. He tweeted, "The internet, by nature, is inclusive and not exclusive. It offers equity of access and equality of opportunity."

Pahwa, who fought hard against Airtel and Facebook to ensure the internet remains neutral, was confident the decision won’t affect India’s stance on net neutrality. However, he is apprehensive that Indian telecom companies might borrow a leaf from their US counterparts and lobby hard to repeal the rules.

“I don't think the FCC decision affects the Indian regulation in any way, because the Indian regulator TRAI has already established strong and well rooted principles for Net Neutrality regulations in India. The only thing that worries me is that Indian telecom operators will use the developments in the US to push back against Net Neutrality with renewed vigour,” he said.

So, on the face of it, while India is well insulated from the catastrophe the United States has embarked upon, it is important to watch what the US is doing closely and make sure we don’t repeat their mistakes here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/digit-in-subhrojit-mallick-november-24-2017-why-you-should-keep-a-close-eye-on-the-net-neutrality-debate-in-the-us

Why We Should All Worry About The Mandatory Imposition Of Aadhaar

praskrishna — 2017-03-27T15:02:10Z

It appears that with each passing day, the government is linking an increasing number of benefits and government services to the 12-digit biometric-based Aadhaar number for Indians, despite growing concerns around its data privacy and security.

The article by Rimin Dutt and Ivan Mehta was published by Huffington Post on March 24, 2017. Sunil Abraham was quoted.

Aadhaar, which collects among other information, citizens' iris scans and fingerprints and stores them into a centralised database for a prolonged time with only loose guidelines and no pre-existing laws to ensure the privacy of that data, is now linked to no less than 38 government schemes, including the government's latest directive –- that Aadhaar become mandatory for tax filing and securing PAN numbers -- introduced by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley earlier this week.

Jaitley openly admitted on Wednesday in the Parliament that the government, in effect, would be forcing people to get Aadhaar in an effort to increase tax compliance.

Aadhaar's use, by no means, is restricted to government agencies alone. A growing number of private financial institutions are now fulfilling their "Know Your Customer" or e-KYC formalities by making Aadhaar compulsory. The government is also in the process of making Aadhaar the basis of all financial transactions.

While the timing of the government's aggressive push of Aadhaar, in itself, is raising eyebrows among political observers, there are some serious concerns about this unique experiment that deserve stronger scrutiny.

Why disregard the Supreme Court?

In making Aadhaar mandatory for filing taxes and securing core taxpayer identity, the government has openly gone against a Supreme Court order from last year that explicitly stated that the Aadhaar Card scheme is "purely voluntary" and cannot be made mandatory until the court has decided on this.

The government has defended its move, saying it is allowed to do so under the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act 2016.

However, as Gopal Krishna, a member of the Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties, writes in Business Today, the passage of the Act by the Parliament "does not automatically imply that any agency can make UID/Aadhaar compulsory disregarding the Supreme Court's orders."

According to Krishna, in doing so, the government is "clearly stepping beyond" the mandate of the Aadhaar Act, and also acting in contempt of the Parliament, according to him.

In addition, if tax evasion was the driving factor behind the move, it begs the question — wouldn't forcing people to get Aadhaar actually do the opposite by adding another layer of hassle?

Indeed, tax experts have noted how this requirement may hinder tax collection. Archit Gupta, Founder & CEO ClearTax.com, a tax service provider told HuffPost India, "The [Aadhaar] announcement is likely to be a dampener to tax filers, specially first-timers ... FY 2016-17 filing is expected to see a large number of first-time filers due to demonetisation efforts, and this move may make them more guarded."

Why not strengthen PAN?

The government already has an extensive mandate for the Permanent Account Number (PAN) cards, which are required to validate several important services or for undertaking transactions such as buying and selling property or jewellery worth over ₹2 lakhs. Last year, the government, in fact, said that the National Pension System (NPS) scheme would accept PAN cards over Aadhaar cards to validate new customers.

On Wednesday, however, Jaitley said PAN cards have been misused by certain people to evade taxes, and there are reports that Aadhaar may become the ultimate authenticating document. However, the continued and growing use of PAN along with Aadhaar adds an extra layer of formalities for citizens to access government services, which are their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

How safe is Aadhaar anyway?

Depending on who you talk to, the safety concerns of Aadhaar come up as a pressing issue, especially in the wake of a recent security incident when the Unique Identification Authority of India initiated police action against entities associated with Axis Bank including Suvidhaa Infoserve and e-sign provider eMudhra, which had allegedly engaged in unauthorised authentication and impersonation by illegally storing Aadhaar biometrics.

Earlier this month, in a separate incident, security researcher Srinivas Kodali warned Indian authorities of a website that was leaking Aadhaar demographic data of over five lakh minors, as well as the existence several parallel databases that had key identification data linked to Aadhaar, Scroll reported.

In the absence of any privacy laws in India, these security concerns have assumed even greater significance.

UIDAI, the authority behind Aadhaar, has maintained the technology behind Aadhaar is robust and that it uses advanced encryption to transmit and store data. It specifically denied that any breach of centralised data took place in the Axis Bank incident, saying the case was an isolated incident.

However, in a rather ironic twist in the Aadhaar Act, which itself contains no provisions to address privacy concerns, any legal action against any misuse or theft of Aadhaar data can only be initiated by UIDAI, leaving citizens with no legal recourse should a breach occur.

That represents an obvious conflict of interest as it gives exclusive power to the very authority that is responsible for the security and confidentiality of identity information and authentication records, PRS Legislative Research, has noted.

In addition, the controversial Aadhaar Act contains several other inherent dangers such as the potential to profile citizens based on the linking of other databases with Aadhaar by studying patterns of behaviour.

"Techniques such as running computer programmes across datasets for pattern recognition can be used for various purposes such as detecting potential illegal activities...However, these can also lead to harassment of innocent individuals who get identified incorrectly as potential threats," noted PRS Legislative.

There are currently no safeguards to prevent inappropriate profiling, instances of which could increase as more and more private organisations link their data to Aadhaar, and potentially exploit data for commercial purposes without the consent of citizens.

The US, in comparison, has laws in place that require agencies that collects data to submit an annual report to US Congress on all such data mining activities.

Other unresolved concerns

There are several other concerns related to the widespread use of Aadhaar card and the power it is afforded under the Aadhar act. The act allows UIDAI to collect biometric information beyond iris and fingerprint scans, for example, to include other bio-data such as DNA, noted PRS.

The act also allows private agencies to use Aadhaar, which contradicts an earlier stated objective of the scheme that sought to restrict the use of Aadhaar for only government expenditures.

"It allows private persons to use Aadhaar as a proof of identity for any purpose. This provision will enable private entities such as, airline, telecom, insurance, real estate etc. companies, to require Aadhaar as a proof of identity for availing their services," PRS has noted.

There's also the worrying prospect of Aadhaar being used as a surveillance tool by the government, instead of an e-governance technology, Sunil Abraham, executive director of research organisation, Centre for Internet and Society, told the The Hindu Business Line, adding biometrics only make citizens transparent to the state and not the state transparent to citizens.

"We warned the government six years ago, but they ignored us," said Abraham.

Krishna has a more dire warning: "The JAM Trinity -- Jan Dhan Yojana, Aadhaar and mobile numbers -- may well be a fish bait to trap unsuspecting citizens into the world's biggest transnational biometric database to turn them into subjects under surveillance forever in the name of a set of welfare and anti-poverty policies.

What has been done to address the security concerns?

It is unclear what the government or UIDAI may have done in the wake of the security incident to upgrade its systems. According to an expert HuffPost Post India talked to, many third party apps that are using Aadhar data may not be screened or audited for security, which is a huge worry.

Kodali told HuffPost India that Aadhaar has potential design issues when it comes to information security.

"By design it allows anyone store information of the Aadhaar holder through [application programming interface]. This is creating many parallel databases with Aadhaar as a key," he said.

He notes that security is an afterthought for many institutions and companies.

"UIDAI and the architects of Aadhaar do not accept that data can be a liability instead of an asset," he said. "The mandatory nature of Aadhaar without the right infrastructure and skilled workforce is not just a cyber security issue, but a national security issue."

When will India get privacy laws?

No one quite knows. But there's a growing call for a need for strict privacy laws, given the move towards digital financial transactions and growing e-commerce use. Most advanced economies including the US, the UK, France, Australia and New Zealand have enacted privacy laws.

However, in India, the right to privacy still doesn't exist despite it being recognised by even the UN charter of human rights. Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

The potential for cyber criminals to misuse citizen data isn't lost on even prominent IT industry experts.

Recently, the chief of IT industry body Nasscom R Chandrashekhar told PTI that personal data of online consumers can never be fully secure, emphasising the need for strict consumer protection laws. "More than 3 million credit card data details were misused recently. Let us face it, these kind of security breaches will take place. There is nothing called fully perfect security in IT," he said.

To be sure, Aadhaar has been lauded by several prominent experts and economists, and it is, undoubtedly, an ambitious project to potentially aid financial inclusion for a large population that has historically been outside of a formal financial services net. India also has one of the lowest tax compliance rates, making tax collection a priority for the government.

Recently, Paul Romer, World Bank's chief economist told Bloomberg, "The system in India is the most sophisticated that I've seen ... It's the basis for all kinds of connections that involve things like financial transactions. It could be good for the world if this became widely adopted."

But given the sensitivity of citizen biometrics data and potential for misuse, the government ought to be held accountable for its proper use and ensure enough safeguards are put in place before its imposition on each citizen.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/huffington-post-rimin-dutt-ivan-mehta-march-24-2017-why-we-should-all-worry-about-the-mandatory-imposition-of-aadhaar