Grand Valley State University

ScholarWorks@GVSU
Honors Projects Undergraduate Research and Creative Practice

2015

How Technology is Killing Privacy

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/honorsprojects

Recommended Citation
Alexander, John, "How Technology is Killing Privacy" (2015). Honors Projects. 397.
http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/honorsprojects/397

This Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Undergraduate Research and Creative Practice at ScholarWorks@GVSU. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Honors Projects by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@GVSU. For more information, please contact
scholarworks@gvsu.edu.
HOW TECHNOLOGY IS
KILLING PRIVACY

John Alexander
April 2015
 Alexander 1

Privacy concerns seem to come up daily in the news these days, whether it be

government spying through the NSA or people willingly giving information about themselves

away on social media. It seems as if no one has any privacy anymore. As actor Will Smith said in

a recent interview on the show ‘Vecherniy Urgant’, “I was very dumb when I was 14. See, no

Twitter, no Facebook when I was 14. So I was dumb, but I was dumb in private.” His view is a

common one – that people, especially young people, are being exposed to privacy risks through

their use of technology. Willingly given or not the formerly private information of the populace

is being stored, tracked, and sold to buyers for both legal and illegal use. Though there are

many stories in the news about privacy concerns the general public doesn’t seem to be worried,

or are perhaps too ill-informed to be worried. Is this problem truly nothing to be concerned

about, or is the lack of concern letting this problem spiral out of control?

Defining Privacy

The best place to start is with a definition of privacy in the context of technology. The

best way to describe privacy in this context is in terms of “restricted access/limited control”

(Tavani and Moor 2001). Restricted access means that there is a form of privacy where some

people are allowed access and others are not, so a person can stop others from viewing their

information if they so choose. It is reasonable to expect the same amount of privacy in these

situations that one would have if not using technology. To ensure control over their personal

data, individuals need to have what is called limited control over their personal data so that

they can ensure restricted access. This can be as simple as being able to toggle privacy settings

on a Facebook page. The reason this definition is important is because there has always been a

tradeoff between a loss of privacy and a perceived benefit or convenience. If a person doesn’t
 Alexander 2

have ownership of their privacy, they don’t have anything to trade within this scenario.

However, when using a website, the ‘control’ a user may feel they have may just be an illusion.

Even with all of the privacy settings turned on, there is no guarantee that Facebook isn’t going

to use your data.

From both the side of the consumer and the companies that want the consumer

information, there is a cost-benefit analysis to be done. Every time a person decides to join a

new social network, they have decided that they are willing to hand over certain personal

information about themselves so they can easily stay connected with their friends and family.

They pay the cost of handing over some personal information for what they see as the benefit

of being in touch with their friends and family (Ng-Kruelle 2002). A cost benefit like this is

totally up to the individual – a person that is very concerned with their personal privacy may

not think this tradeoff is worth it and because of this may abstain from creating a Facebook

profile.

For a business, the costs and benefits are usually in terms of money, so they are much

easier to compare. These services are generally free and make their money from selling user

information to advertisers to target ads to people that are more likely to be interested in the

advertisement. So the bottom line for the business is seeing if they are making enough money

collecting the information of users and selling it to continue to offer the services they provide. If

the company can get enough users on its platform, then the tradeoff is usually worth it and

those companies stay in business.

As far as a business using services for themselves, they have to deal with many of the

same issues that consumers do, except that their data leaks could be worth millions of dollars.

Businesses struggle with policies when it comes to cloud services because they need to be

ensured that their data is secure. Many software companies are only offering their products in

the Software as a Service (SaaS) models, where their applications run on servers that the

software company owns. This kind of model means that the company using the software runs

the application through the cloud, entrusting the software company to protect their data.

Depending on the kind of software, this data could be anything, from customer data to secret

information about upcoming products. In situations like these, the benefit is getting to use the

software while the cost is the risk of storing their data externally with another company. To

mitigate this risk, most companies have strict policies as to what data can be stored externally

and what data is only allowed to be stored internally, as well as what cloud services users

within the company are allowed to use.

The restricted access/limited control view of privacy can become problematic when it

comes to government surveillance, because it isn’t always possible to avoid having their privacy

invaded. The Patriot Act was a reactionary bill passed after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It has

widely been understood as “a ‘sweeping’ antiterrorism law that gave the government ‘vast new

powers’ to conduct electronic surveillance over the Internet” (Kerr 2003). Basically the

government had the power to search through everything on the Internet under the premise of

this act. The only way to avoid government surveillance is to not use electronic communication

at all. This situation is a different set of costs and benefits to the average person. You can either

maintain your privacy by not using electronic communication; or, you can just accept the fact
 Alexander 4

that the things you’re doing on the Internet/the conversations you’re having on the phone

could be getting tracked by the government and use these technologies anyway. The vast

majority of the population will choose the latter – much to the benefit of the U.S. government.

Not using the Internet is out of the question for most people, especially young people. They just

accept that they could be being watched, claiming that they “have nothing to hide”. They don’t

realize the value of their personal information, and the benefit of modern technology is so

great that the cost of privacy loss would have to be astronomical for them to stop using it.

Who is Taking Our Information?

There are a number of different groups looking to gather information on people,

because information can lead to knowledge and knowledge is power. Luckily for the people

looking for information, the Internet makes it easy to gather a large amount of information

quickly. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange described the Internet as the “greatest spying

machine the world has ever seen” (Kingsley 2011). It is easy to see why he thinks that this is the

case. Some of the organizations looking to collect user data are Facebook, Google, and the

National Security Administration of the United States.

The National Security Administration (NSA) is an organization that has roots in code

breaking in World War I and World War II, but has grown into one of the largest government

organizations in terms of staff and funding. There are estimates that say that the NSA has

nearly 40,000 employees and an estimated budget of $11 billion, though it is probably more

than that (Verble 2014). Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the NSA was discreetly authorized

to spy on American citizens without a warrant to do so, which has stirred up quite a bit of
 Alexander 5

controversy. Though the NSA seems to continuously get surveillance powers stripped and then

later secretly given back, it seems that the NSA continues to spy on people both domestically

and abroad without any public uproar. However, the NSA has been caught spying on foreign

leaders – including those that are supposed to be our allies.

Two other major players – Google and Facebook – have similar tactics and similar goals.

Both companies provide a number of services to users free of charge, because their primary

source of revenue is selling user information to advertisers. These companies have the

capability to track user traffic and are essentially giant databases filled with user information

that can be mined and sold for a profit. While Google and Facebook aren’t the only websites

that do this, they are two of the major players that come up when user privacy is discussed. Just

to check how much Google knows about you, you can check your ‘Google Ads’ settings where

they use the data they have collected on you to guess your age, gender, and interests. This is

the information that Google uses to tailor ads to everyone that uses their services.

What is the Information Used For?

If a service is being offered to you for “free”, chances are that you are the “product”.

Your time and eyes are what are making companies like Facebook and Google money. In the

case of Facebook, advertisers pay them for two different types of ads. Some ads are blanket ads

that have an equal chance of being seen by everyone. However, most of the advertising money

that Facebook is from targeted ads. Facebook searches through the likes and statuses of users

to target ads at the people that would be most likely to buy the advertised products. Basically,
 Alexander 6

the information that Facebook collects on its users is “sold” to companies that want to

advertise on their platform.

Google does the same thing with information it has gathered on users, but most of

Google’s revenue still comes from sponsored search results. According to ‘Location-Based

Sponsored Search Advertising’, sponsored search consists of three parties: “(i) users pose

keyword queries with the goal of receiving relevant material; (ii) advertisers aim at promoting

their product their product or service through a properly designed ad, and target relevant users

by declaring to the search engine a set of keywords that capture their interest; (iii) the search

engine mediates between users and advertisers, and facilitates that interaction”(Trimponias

2013). So every time a word is searched in Google, all the sponsors who have paid for a bid

every time that word shows up has a chance of appearing as one of the first three searches on

the page. If you are logged into Google, your searches are also tracked so that ads that they

deem relevant to you can be shown at any time.

Many businesses use data mined from users to look at consumer trends. Programs like

Meijer’s “M-Perks” have customers register for a rewards cards that often give them a small

percentage off of their purchases. Companies are willing to do this because the information

gained from these programs is much more valuable than the amount the customers end up

saving. When customers register for these programs, they have to fill out their age, gender, and

other demographic information before they receive their cards. The company then links this

demographic information to customer purchases that they use to gain valuable insight about

what kind of customers are buying what, as well as what items are bought together. Customers
 Alexander 7

can benefit from this information, as coupons are targeted to them based on their purchases to

encourage them to come back to that store.

As it is a part of the United States government, the NSA isn’t looking to make money off

of the information of the people. The primary focus of the NSA is to protect America from

outside threats, which what they do with the information they gather. While many people think

the NSA overreach with their methods, supporters say the NSA is “serving as a key bulwark

against foreign terrorists and that it would be reckless to constrain the agency's mission”

(Gorman 2008). While people like the fact that potential terrorist attacks are being stopped,

many are still upset that the NSA is collecting and storing nearly every form of communication

imaginable, including phone calls and emails. When it was revealed that the NSA were

recording and storing all phone calls, one study found that 59% of Americans disapproved of

the US Government secretly collecting phone records (Verble 2014). While some people just

like to maintain their privacy, others still are concerned about the data that the NSA has

collected getting into the wrong hands and being exploited in some way or released by a

hacker, or an insider like Edward Snowden.

Hackers are another class of people that are looking to use the personal information of

others. These hackers generally have a more malicious intent than legitimate organizations like

Google or Facebook, such as identity theft or credit card theft. The key difference is that while

other organizations make money off user data by selling the data to advertisers, hackers are

generally trying to steal the money directly from the users. Many people’s objections to data

collection by anyone is due to these hackers, and therefore much of the security that is

implemented is to prevent these sort of attacks from working. When people are up in arms
 Alexander 8

about the NSA’s spying, they are upset because of the invasion of privacy and because of the

risk of the NSA databases being hacked, and their information being used for nefarious

purposes.

Should we be Worried?
The increase in information gathering, with or without the knowledge and consent of

the people whose information is being gathered, is definitely cause for alarm. However,

different demographics of people have varying levels of concern when it comes to information

privacy. Younger people, for example, are less likely to be concerned about Internet privacy

than their older counterparts, even though they are more likely to know that their information

is being collected and tracked. Females are more likely to be concerned with Internet privacy

than males, and people with more education are less likely to be concerned (Zukowski 2007).

Interestingly, the more familiar with the Internet the person seems to be, the more

comfortable they seem to be with their personal data being collected.

The issue with user data collection is the risk of misuse, and what different

people/companies view as proper use of personal information. For example, insurance

companies have been mining for client data to look for possible health risks, and have been

accused of changing client rates based on the data they have mined. This is different than a

client disclosing their own health risks as the information gathered by the insurance company

may be inaccurate, and may lead to clients being overcharged for their insurance. Another

situation of a company overreaching is when Target revealed a pregnancy of a teenaged girl to

her father when they sent a “congratulations” to her home after noticing that she recently

bought larger handbags, tissues, and headache pills. While marketers clearly thought that it was
 Alexander 9

an acceptable marketing ploy, many people saw it as a clear invasion of privacy and an abuse of

data mining (Virani 2015).

Something to consider when you think of your privacy when using the Internet is how

these companies like Facebook make money – essentially by selling “you”. In fact, Facebook has

been caught showing false endorsements from a user’s friends for products they have been

paid to advertise, and don’t tell you when they do so (Virani 2015). What happens in these

situations is that an ad will appear on user A’s Facebook, claiming that user B recommends a

product to them, when in reality user B has probably never used the product being endorsed by

“them” and has no idea that their name is being used to advertise a product.

Facebook builds an unnervingly accurate model of who you are as a person by reading

your statuses, private messages, and likes. Facebook can also track you on any page that has a

plug-in ‘like this on Facebook’ button, following you around the web outside of Facebook to

gather more data on you. All of this data is being collected on users, and Facebook is just one of

the many companies collecting data. This is scary, because these companies make money by

selling user data, and the laws can’t keep up with the technology when it comes to the Internet.

Users have no idea what the companies collecting data are going to do with it. It is hard to stop

them from doing anything because there are few laws, if any, to prevent the collection and sale

of user data.

The fact that companies are making money from your personal information, and that

there are very few limitations to what they can do with that information, should be very

concerning. In many cases the only thing holding these companies back is the bad PR they
 Alexander 10

would get if they got found doing something that many would consider to be unethical. Many

companies are already doing unethical things (or have the potential to do unethical things)

hidden away in long terms of use agreements that no regular user reads. Unless something

changes or something is done to stop it, the whole situation could easily spiral out of control

and become a much bigger issue than it already is. However, there would have to be a massive

push for the protection of privacy from average citizens for any changes to occur. The

companies won’t back off unless people protest, and the government won’t make any laws

regarding privacy unless the citizens demand it.

How People and Organizations View Privacy Differently

organizations services don’t see eye to eye on privacy issues. Users are likely to assume that

their ‘private’ information isn’t being looked at and used by companies for their own uses,

failing to realize that social media profiles are just giant databases waiting to be mined. They

believe that because other users can’t see their information, no one can. Companies, on the

other hand, realize the value of the wealth of information being willingly put places where they

can pay to access it. Facebook’s privacy policy even says “You give us permission to use your

name, profile picture, content and information in connection with commercial, sponsored or

related content (such as a brand you like), served or enhanced by us” (Virani 2015). They tell

you in their policy that they can share your information with businesses, however many users

do not realize that their personal information isn’t just for them and their friends when they

post in online.
 Alexander 11

The public’s view on the privacy is usually that they would be opposed to companies

collecting and using their information – if they knew what was going on. Companies take

advantage of the ignorance of the populace to get away with more than they should. For nearly

every convenience provided by a free service, there is a price to be paid. Many people choose

the “log in with Facebook” option on apps and websites because it’s convenient and they don’t

feel like creating a completely new profile. When users do this, they are giving Facebook more

information about themselves. Users need to become better educated on what information is

being taken by the services they use so they can better evaluate the tradeoff of the information

they give up about themselves and the service provided by these services.

What’s the benefit?

While some people have no idea how much of their data is being tracked, others are

well aware of what is happening and choose to be apathetic about their information being

collected. For these apathetic people, the tradeoff between the loss of privacy and the use of

the technology is worth it. If avoiding having your information tracked means that you can’t use

the latest cool smartphone application, many people will bite that bullet and use the app

anyway. To them using the newest and coolest technology is more important than being

private. There is a conscious tradeoff between privacy and services provided that many people

make on a daily basis.

Beyond the simple fact of using the available services, there are ways that users can

benefit from their information being tracked. An example is when there are advertisements

targeted at individuals based on the profile that has been built on them – what if they actually
 Alexander 12

want the product that was advertised to them? People could find products that they are

interested in through this type of advertising which is the whole point of the advertisements in

the first place. Targeted advertisements are meant to show people products that they would

want to buy; and when it works, everyone comes out of the situation happy. A similar benefit

are coupons targeted at people based on their interests or past purchases, as consumers can

really benefit from the savings available from these sorts of deals. These kinds of coupons are

especially prevalent when stores use rewards programs, as rewards accounts are just an easier

way to track someone and their purchasing history.

There are other ways seemingly invasive technologies can end up helping users with

their daily lives. With tracking technology in phones and cars, there are applications popping up

designed to help you avoid traffic and to give you alternate routes around the traffic, such as

the popular “Waze” smartphone application (Jeske 2013). As more technology peripherals are

developed, more health applications are being developed to track your heart rate, blood

pressure, and basically any of the basic bodily functions that you would want to track. This

technology could help detect the warning signs of more serious problems and advise you to

seek medical attention when needed. However, a downside to this type of information is that it

could also be tracked by insurance companies who will raise your rates at the slightest sign of

health trouble.

Some other assistive technologies that we willing hand our data over to are financial

services like Mint and Financial Advisor. These websites help you manage your money and

investments. To use them, users provide access to their financial records, which is some of the

most private information that a person has. However, many people have entrusted their
 Alexander 13

information to these services because the value of the guidance offered is worth the risk of

something bad potentially happening to their data. However, there is always a danger of these

services being hacked into, or if an employee for one of these companies decides to take user

information and sell it to the highest bidder. With nearly every benefit offered by any online

service, there are always dangers and tradeoffs that need to be considered – and many people

do not.

How to Protect Yourself

making sure you are informed and know what the services you are using are doing with the

data you are giving them. You cannot make an informed decision on the tradeoff between

privacy and use of a service if you do not know how much of your privacy is being invaded.

While it is the responsibility of the companies or individuals to use people’s data responsibly, it

is also the responsibility of the users to make sure that they are not being taken advantage of. If

users do not do their research, they can hardly complain when something they don’t approve of

is happening with their data.

The problem with the “do your research” method of protection is that many companies

make their End-User License Agreements (EULAs) intentionally confusing and full of legal

jargon, which often make them hard to read to anyone without a degree in law. Companies do

this so that the few people who do read the EULA will likely not understand what it is saying, all

while covering themselves in case of a lawsuit. That way, if someone catches the company

doing something that seems wrong, the company can often point to a specific part of the EULA

and claim that the user agreed to it when they accept the EULA. However, there are often posts
 Alexander 14

online that break down the more ‘interesting’ parts of a popular company’s EULA into more

understandable terms. These are the types of websites the average person should be looking

for while they do their research.

There are much more active things that users can do to protect their privacy that aren’t

simply researching. One of these things is to download browser extensions that can help to

stop people from gathering information about you while you can use the Internet. Adblock Plus

(available at https://adblockplus.org/) is a browser extension that not only blocks ads from your

browsing experience, but also disables third-party tracking cookies and scripts. Websites can

host these kinds of scripts and not tell you where they are sending the data they have collected,

so blocking them can go a long way in the quest to stay private.

Adblock Plus works pretty well blocking basic tracking, but an extension called

Disconnect (available at https://disconnect.me/) blocks third party tracking cookies and gives

you control over all elements and scripts on a webpage. Disconnect also stops websites like

Twitter, Google, and Facebook from tracking your web presence, both when you are using their

services and when you are not. This extension also prevents you from an attack called

“sidejacking” where an attacker can use stolen cookies to access your personal data.

There are some other extensions and programs that are worth looking into as well. Web

of Trust (https://www.mywot.com/en/download) is an extension that ranks websites by

reputation, and will tell you if a site has been reported to have malware. Malwarebytes Anti-

Malware (https://www.malwarebytes.org/mwb-download/) is a free program that is very well

known for being great at detecting unwanted malware and adware on your system. Looking
 Alexander 15

into email encryption is worthwhile as well, to protect your emails from prying eyes. A good

Chrome extension for this is called Virtru Email Encryption (available in the chrome web store).

You can simply hit the ‘encrypt’ button before sending an email and the email encrypts for you,

assuring it safely reaches the proper destination.

The problem with browser extensions, even the well trusted ones that I have listed, is

that they often need to collect data on you as well just to function. Many of them (like Adblock)

are run off of user donations, but it can view and track all of the sites that anyone that uses it

has visited, even if cookies were turned off in the browser. If someone found an exploit or

security hole in the extension, then data about you is once again in the hands of someone you

don’t want it to be in the hands of. Because of this, the best protection is still to be careful and

to be informed. There are no amount of extensions or programs that can protect someone if

they are being reckless on the Internet. A good rule to live by for watching what you post is to

assume that everything that you say on the Internet can be traced back to you somehow. Living

by this rule, you can be assured that nothing private about you will be in anyone’s hands but

your own.

Resolving the Privacy Issue

The issue with the entire privacy problem is how quickly the technology moves

compared to anyone’s reaction to it. Laws can’t keep up because they can take years to get

passed and they are no longer relevant if they ever do. Users rarely stay up to date on the

newest technologies and often don’t realize how much of their information is being tracked.
 Alexander 16

For anything to change in a meaningful way there will need to be a major change in the mindset

for everyone – users, lawmakers, and companies.

The mindset that everyone would need to have to make a difference is that of privacy

first, information second. There are too many downsides to this sort of mindset for it to be

viable, because the information is valuable to too many parties. For companies, the information

is worth money. For some companies, like Facebook, the information of others is their main

source of income. For others, the information provides valuable insight into the minds of

customers that greatly improves profits. For the government, the information gathered is

invaluable to organizations like the NSA and others to fulfill their various objectives. The NSA’s

entire purpose is entrenched in the information of others, so it is extremely unlikely (and

counterproductive to their mission) that the government would do anything drastic when it

came to information collection policies.

The only people that could possibly instigate any changes are those who the information

isn’t worth money to – the users. However, there would have to be some loud voices and some

even bigger sacrifices for any changes to be made. No matter how loud everyone shouts,

changes will not be made until you hit the companies where it hurts – their wallets. Companies

don’t care if you disapprove of their methods if you continue to use their products. However, if

there are large scale boycotts, that will get the attention of the companies and force them to

make changes. Most users would be unwilling to boycott anything, because the services are too

valuable to give up for a significant period of time. However, if there really is going to be a

change the companies need to be losing money, and need to know that they are losing money

because people disapprove of their collection policies. Until that happens, the only way that the
 Alexander 17

individuals who are concerned about privacy can be safe is to minimize their use of

technologies that can be traced and collected.

Unfortunately for those who are concerned about privacy, more companies are now

using cloud-based models instead of allowing users to install software locally. This is a move

even farther away from privacy, because now these software companies are storing all of the

data that is passing through their system. For example, Microsoft is moving away from their

traditional model with their Office products with the release of ‘Office 365’, where all of the

software is based in Microsoft’s cloud. Many individuals, educational institutions, and

businesses use Microsoft Office data, and now Microsoft can see all of it with the default

settings. For the near future, it looks as if things are going to get worse before they get better.

Conclusion

A person’s privacy is just as valuable as ever, the only thing that has changed as

technology as changed in recent years is who holds the value. While each individual used to

hold the value of their own privacy, companies now sell private information of others to make

money. These companies continue because of user ignorance and user apathy – people either

don’t know or don’t care enough to try to change how the system works. While it may seem

harmless to most of the public now; as technology improves, it will only get more and more

invasive. The benefits of the technology will improve as well. At some point, the public needs to

draw a line in the sand and say that enough is enough.

Until the point where the public makes a stand is reached, the best way to stay

protected is to make sure you are well informed about the technologies that you are using.
 Alexander 18

While companies may try to hide how much of your information they are taking, constant

vigilance can help you protect your personal information from those who seek to profit off of it.

In some cases this may mean that, to be safe, you may not be able to use the coolest new

technology. You need to as an individual take ownership of your personal information and

make a conscious decision on what you are going to share and with whom you are going to

share it. If you do this, you are trading your information instead of just handing it over. If you

choose not to make that trade, then you are telling that company what you think in the most

effective way – with your wallet.

When it comes to government spying, it the responsibility of citizens to make it clear

that the type of spying that the NSA is doing isn’t acceptable. Until pressure is put on

lawmakers to repeal the excessive parts of the Patriot Act and to put new regulations in place

to describe how much information that government agencies can collect about people, nothing

will change. Pressure can be applied in various ways – calling or writing to your local

representatives, signing petitions and encouraging others to do the same, and most importantly

by voting for those who have the same viewpoint that you do on this issue.

Technology, especially in the past 20 years, has resulted in many conveniences that we

enjoy every day. Facebook, Google, and even email are technologies that didn’t exist until quite

recently, and while the value of these things is great, your value to them is even greater. No

matter how many privacy controls you put in place, if you use these services your data can be

viewed by the company that runs the service. Oftentimes, they can do whatever they want with

that data because of what users agree to in the Terms of Service for their product. No one

would go so far as to suggest that we should get rid of these services, but a very critical analysis
 Alexander 19

needs to be cast their way to see what data is actually being collected. No one truly knows what

is happening to the data once it is the hands of these companies. Personal information has

value, and should not be given away for free.

Citations
Carani, Salim. "Get Your Loved Ones off Facebook." Get Your Loved Ones off Facebook. 29 Jan.
2015. Web. 1 Jan. (2015). <http://saintsal.com/facebook/>.
Gorman, Siobhan. "NSA's Domestic Spying Grows As Agency Sweeps Up Data." The Wall Street
Journal 10 Mar. 2008. Web.
Jeske, Tobias. "Floating Car Data from Smartphones: What Google And Waze Know About You
and How Hackers Can Control Traffic." Black Hat Europe (2013). Print.
Kerr, Orin S. “Internet Surveillance Law after the USA Patriot Act: The Big Brother that Isn't.”
Northwestern University Law Review (2003).
Kingsley, Patrick. "Julian Assange Tells Students That the Web Is the Greatest Spying Machine
Ever." The Guardian 15 Mar. (2011). Web.
Ng-Kruelle, Grace, Paul A. Swatman, and Douglas S. Rebne. "The Price of Convenience: Privacy
and Mobile Commerce." Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce 3.3 (2002): 273-85. Print.
Tavani, Herman T., and James H. Moor. "Privacy Protection, Control of Information, and
Privacy-enhancing Technologies." ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society (2001): 6-11. Print.
Trimponias, George, Ilaria Bartolini, and Dimitris Papadias. "Location-Based Sponsored Search
Advertising." Advances in Spatial and Temporal Databases (2013). Print.
Smith, Will. "Vecherniy Urgant." Interview by Ivan Urgant. Vecherniy Urgant. Channel One.
Ostankino, Moscow, Russia, 31 May 2013. Television.
Verble, Joseph. "The NSA and Edward Snowden: Surveillance in the 21st Century." IGCAS
Computers & Society 44.3 (2014): 14-20. Print.
Virani, Salim. "Get Your Loved Ones off Facebook." Get Your Loved Ones off Facebook. 29 Jan.
2015. Web. <http://saintsal.com/facebook/>.
Zukowski, Tomasz, and Irwin Brown. "Examining the Influence of Demographic Factors on
Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns." South African Institute of Computer Scientists
and Information Technologists (2007). Print.