Please reply to the below: Playdevil's advocate byprovidinglogical arguments that oppose those presented in someoneelse's initial post.

Initial post

Privacy Laws

Question #1

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) have been instrumental in upholding the privacy of internet users. However, COPPA is more effective in encouraging websites to limit the Internet resources available to young persons through largely unenforceable age restrictions instead of preventing unfair and deceptive practices against minor internet users (Matecki, 2010). CISPA allows companies to voluntarily share information but only if they relate to cybersecurity, which means that it fails to provide a comprehensive framework for guaranteeing the privacy of internet users. ECPA guarantees that electronic communications of users are protected, but its scope is limited since it only applies to email, telephone conversations, and electronically stored data (PennLibraries, 2023). As such, additional privacy laws detailing the scope of privacy protections available to children and institute guidelines for determining ethical and unethical privacy violations to protect internet users are also covered. Privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs) can also be integrated into privacy protections since they minimize personal data use in the internet to guarantee data security (Kaaniche et al., 2020).

Question #2

Most of the cybersecurity laws in my state align with the federal cybersecurity legislations and guidelines. As such, the enhancement of cybersecurity laws should focus on acknowledging and integrating emerging innovations such as homomorphic encryption to secure a technology user's privacy. This approach guarantees that data is kept in an encrypted state during data processing to maintain its integrity or prevent manipulation (Yang et al., 2023). This prevents data breach and ensures that data remains secure during processing and analysis to maintain privacy of users.

Question #3

With respect to privacy, unethical behavior entails omnipresent surveillance of internet users and unauthorized sharing of user data with third parties. Ethical behavior entails obtaining user consent before data collection and sharing as well as minimizing inducements that encourage people to reveal their personal information. As such, people are expected to lose some degree of privacy when using technologies due to their preference for convenience. The complacency of technology users makes them believe that revealing their private information allows commercial (and public) organizations to make their lives easier (by targeting their needs) (Rainey & Anderson, 2014). This implies that the divide between convenience and privacy has motivated people to surrender their privacy rights to service providers.

Classmate post:

Good evening, everyone. Another Saturday night in front of the laptop instead of a beer, or at the beach, or both. Hopefully, everyone has plans for the warm weather this weekend. Either way, enjoy it, summer will be here soon.

In descending order - With respect to privacy, how do we differentiate between illegal and unethical behavior?Illegal refers to actions that are against the law, while unethical refers to actions that go against moral principles and values. In our decaying society, unethical behaviors often lead to illegal action(s) that lack policy for prosecution.

If we use technology, are we expected to lose some degree of privacy?Unfortunately, yes. This is a result of government inaction/regulation, business interest prioritized over privacy, and digital footprint growth, revealing intimate details of our lives.

Examine cybersecurity laws in your home state and advise if the federal government should incorporate some of these state regulations or laws, particularly with respect to privacy interests, or discuss new innovations in technology to secure a technology user's privacy and data and to prevent the breachof sensitivedata.

Unfortunately, Maryland is not one of the 15 states with comprehensive data laws however, it is one of many states that has taken data privacy seriously through multiple Data Privacy based policies/laws. The Maryland Online Data Privacy Act forces data controllers to limit the personal data they collect to what is "reasonably necessary and proportionate" to provide or maintain services requested by consumers (Maryland Attorney General, n.d.-b).

Maryland Information Security Breach Notices. October 2022, Businesses collecting and retainingpersonal information about Maryland residents are required by Maryland law to notify residents if their information is compromised (Maryland Attorney General, n.d.-c).

Judge the efficiencies (or lack thereof) of these three laws regarding privacy. What additional laws or technologies are needed? What about Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs)

Starting with Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs), "As with most technologies, it matters both how PETs are developed and how they will be employed." (House, 2022). Truer words have been spoken in this case. The lack of proactive regulation of AI has all but completely caused widespread fear.

Child Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Instead of "where's the beef", "where are the teeth" and I mean the teeth that cut meat. Let me first say, it's a step in the right direction amidst various other efforts and/or attempts to regain control of what children see, hear, etc. However, civil penalties and/or fines are not the "meat cutting teeth". Violation (knowingly) + Liability (proven) "should" = some form of prosecution.

Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). Old Law competing with new technologies. The Microsoft and Google cases are prime examples of why Congress needs to act. However, ECPA has "meat cutting" teeth, or will show them at least. Violations can result in a 5-year prison sentence and a fine of $250K, ouch. (Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), n.d.).

Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (ECPA)

Again, has "meat cutting teeth". In short, Allows the federal government to use shared cyber threat information for (1) cybersecurity purposes to ensure the integrity, confidentiality, availability, or safeguarding of a system or network; (2) cybersecurity crime investigations; or (3) protection of individuals from the danger of death or serious bodily harm and the prosecution of crimes involving such danger, including child pornography, sexual exploitation, kidnapping, and trafficking. Prohibits the federal government from affirmatively searching such information for any other purpose (Intelligence Committee, n.d.).