Maintaining privacy and safeguarding security frequently require striking a careful balance. Is privacy unassailable in the digital age, or should we put security above everything else in a world where surveillance is growing?
Security vs. Privacy: Which Should Take Precedence?
- Thread starter precious
- Start date
A sacrifice of privacy is the price we pay for the luxury of digital privilege!!! No more having our cake, and eating too!!!
True, and a balance between privacy and security is essential for long-term digital trust and well-being
I conclude all is well- Master has agreed
@precious The balance between privacy and security is indeed a delicate one. In the digital age, both are crucial, and finding the right equilibrium is key. Privacy is a fundamental right that allows individuals to maintain control over their personal information and protect their autonomy. On the other hand, security is essential for protecting individuals and societies from threats, such as cyberattacks, terrorism, and other forms of harm.
Is privacy inviolable, or should security take precedence amid increasing surveillance?
The choice depends on the context and specific needs. In some cases, security might take precedence to protect sensitive information from immediate threats. In others, privacy might be prioritized to ensure personal data is not misused or overexposed.
Security can exist without privacy, but privacy cannot exist without security.
Security can exist without privacy, but privacy cannot exist without security.
Its an ecosystem then since the one thing depends on the other...
Your compliance requirements trump all of this. Not every organization has the same requirements, but, for example, an organization operating in California or Virginia will have a greater adherence to privacy than, say, in Florida, as states adopt their own versions of the EU's GDPR guidance.
General statements about security and privacy themselves are overly nebulous until we define what the asset is, its vulnerability, and threats - in other words, a risk assessment. Every individual, every organization must conduct a proper risk assessment along with compliance requirements before the questions of 'how much privacy' and 'how much security' are required.
I don't think it's a matter of which one gets precedence in a general sense, because it will vary in every single use case.
General statements about security and privacy themselves are overly nebulous until we define what the asset is, its vulnerability, and threats - in other words, a risk assessment. Every individual, every organization must conduct a proper risk assessment along with compliance requirements before the questions of 'how much privacy' and 'how much security' are required.
I don't think it's a matter of which one gets precedence in a general sense, because it will vary in every single use case.
Vulnerability - Weakness in an information system, system security procedures, internal controls, or implementation that could be exploited or triggered by a threat source. Note: The term weakness is synonymous for deficiency. Weakness may result in security and/or privacy risks.
Threat - Any circumstance or event with the potential to adversely impact organizational operations (including mission, functions, image, or reputation), organizational assets, or individuals through an information system via unauthorized access, destruction, disclosure, modification of information, and/or denial of service. Also, the potential for a threat-source to successfully exploit a particular information system vulnerability.
Being the visual learner that I am, this certainly brings the point home more so than the verbiage that I provided!!!
Thank you Mr. Butler!!!
True! It's the classic chicken-and-egg dilemma! One’s only as good as the other!
Great points......Risk assessment and compliance are the real game-changers here.