[BreachExchange] Panama Papers are another blow to privacy

[Audrey McNeil]

http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/04/06/panama-papers-privacy/82680008/

The 11.5 million documents that make up the purloined Panama Papers will
tell many tales and claim many heads.

They also have special significance as a sequel to WikiLeaks and the Edward
Snowden data dump.

It’s the continuing saga of The End of Privacy. No one knows how it will
end.

Average people who willingly share the intimate details of daily life on
Facebook may not see the connection, but there is one.

Think what you share is private? It's not

Sure, this goes way beyond what we are gleefully disclose about ourselves
to “friends” we may never have met. But like Snapchat, Twitter, Instagram
and all the other narcissistic sharing tools, the theft of these documents
is an example of where modern technology is taking us.

It’s easy to connect these days. It’s also easy to collect – and to
disclose things that were never meant for public consumption.

When it happens to somebody else – the high and mighty – or reveals
official shenanigans – like NSA snooping -- the disclosure is hailed and
welcomed.

But when even the elite rich can’t fully guard their financial secrets,
what chance do John and Jane Q. Mainstreet have?

None.

Identity theft vs. the need to know

When breaches of personal information happen to individuals, it’s called
identity theft and it’s done with criminal intent.

But is identity theft really so much different from the grand theft of a
treasure trove of financial secrets of the rich and powerful?

Mossack Fonseca, the Panamanian law firm whose data was breached and
shared, said it is “legal and common for companies to establish commercial
entities in different jurisdictions for a variety of legitimate reasons.”

Reportedly the fourth largest offshore law firm in the world, Mossack
Fonseca says it had “always complied with international protocols.”

Those who took and shared the information gained “unauthorized access to
proprietary documents and information taken from our company.” They stole
it.

Is that OK simply because the individuals whose secrets were disclosed may
have had nefarious reasons for hiding their assets?

Are 14,153 offshore clients corrupt?

Arguably, the world is better off when crooked politicians and their
cronies get caught.

News stories based on the stolen documents talk of nearly 215,000 offshore
shell companies and 14,153 clients of Mossack Fonseca. Are they all crooks?
The network includes 143 politicians, their families and close associates
who allegedly use tax havens to hide huge sums of money. Are they all
corrupt?

Those named include Argentina’s President Mauricio Macri, Ukraine’s
President Petro O. Poroshenko, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif,
Saudi Arabia’s King Salman and others, including associates of Russian
President Vladimir Putin and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto.

The disclosures quickly claimed the political career of the prime minister
of Iceland, who resigned amid outrage over his use of an offshore company
allegedly to avoid declaring a conflict of interest.

Iceland’s PM David Gunnlaugsson claimed he did not conceal assets or try to
avoid paying taxes – even as Icelanders called for his resignation.

He was a casualty. There will be others.

But the very expectation of privacy is also a casualty as technology
facilitates the transfer of large amounts of information that can no longer
be kept private.

The willingness of people to use that technology – for criminal gain or
increased public awareness – is not in doubt.

What remains to be seen is how – or whether – a high-tech world can include
the expectation of privacy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.riskbasedsecurity.com/pipermail/breachexchange/attachments/20160407/838a5c7e/attachment-0001.html>