2-3 page essay

Obermaier and Hutle (2016) express the need for security above all, from their article, “Analyzing the security and privacy of cloud-based video surveillance systems” state that the orientation towards compliance of these camera systems to the privacy side has left the security aspect unchecked, making them susceptible to various vulnerabilities. Obermaier and Hutle employ the use of antithesis and hyperbole as rhetorical devices. Surveillance is, therefore, a good practice when the security of the surveillance systems is enforced then afterward, mechanisms for regulating the usage of these systems are implemented so that in providing security, privacy is not breached.

Kuiper and Eijkman strongly defend their opinion that privacy matters by advocating for a judicial review where privacy will be uplifted by providing restrictions to monitor how surveillance is conducted. The first rhetoric device used is anaphora at the phrase “privacy is a human right and a fundamental right”. This quotation expresses the need to recognize privacy as a right especially since the digital age strongly vouches for the need to control the information and private data that is generated on both a personal level and multinational level. Through Kairos, these scholars link their campaign for privacy to the current trends in the information age, which includes the recognition of privacy as a key element for the building of trust levels between users of software and hardware products and the manufacturers and content providers.

Another rhetorical tool used is hyperbole with the statement that “surveillance does not have to be overly intrusive to affect someone’s life”. This is quite an exaggeration since no country or surveillance unit monitor individual citizens in a way that can be considered as life-threatening. The authors aim at providing a worst-case scenario where privacy is encroached, a case which is yet to be realized. This is an ethos approach where they aim at expressing their worry on how the misuse of surveillance equipment while citing the implementation of security comes a long way to causing privacy issues that may affect how citizens conduct their daily routines. Through hyperbole, the authors incite the feeling of caution on the use of surveillance systems which breach privacy standards so that in the future, this matter will be solved, rather than if it is overlooked in a way that it cascades into more severe breaches on privacy.

Obermaier and Hutle oppose what Kuiper and Eijkman vouch for as they are of the perspective that security should come first, then privacy later on when firm security measures have been realized. This is from research they conducted on mass-market surveillance systems which proved to have primitive security features that predispose the camera systems to vulnerabilities such as eavesdropping on video data and denial of service attacks. One rhetorical device they used is antithesis which connects security vulnerabilities brought shortcomings in privacy as from the statement, “These weaknesses impair the users' privacy and, as a consequence, may also damage the camera system manufacturer's reputation” (p. 22). It, therefore, means that even though privacy is important, the only means through which it is guaranteed is through the implementation of rigid security frameworks in these systems. Through this statement, logos is achieved where the author logically relates the fact that privacy is a result of the enactment of strong security measures.

Another rhetorical device is hyperbole where the authors state that “surveillance systems are ubiquitously available for industrial and private environments”. This is an exaggeration since surveillance systems are specifically placed on environments with possible vulnerabilities to security breaches based on their location or the type of services they render. The ideology that they are ubiquitous is quite an exaggeration since not every household can afford or be linked to the use of these systems. The hyperbole in this statement is meant to indicate how surveillance systems are quickly being adopted to reinforce existing security standards, without minding privacy. This is an extension of Kairos, as it relates the need for surveillance over current trends in the security industry

From the various opinions gathered from both sources, privacy is a current standard that current manufacturers and content providers are struggling to incorporate in their surveillance products and services and it is an appealing element for the current technologies. This is usually reflected in their policies and terms of use which the end-user is required to consent to, before the use of such products and services. Security, however, bears more weight than privacy since it is a building block for the latter. The manufacturers should, therefore, reflect on security, as privacy is a consequence of rigid security frameworks.

Works Cited

Kuiper, G., & Eijkman, Q. (2017). The Value of Privacy and Surveillance Drones in the Public Domain: Scrutinizing the Dutch Flexible Deployment of Mobile Cameras Act. J. Pol. & L., 10, 35.

Obermaier, J., & Hutle, M. (2016, May). Analyzing the security and privacy of cloud-based video surveillance systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Workshop on IoT Privacy, Trust, and Security (pp. 22-28). ACM.