Dangers of File Sharing
06/01/2009Peer-to-peer file-sharing networks can be very powerful tools for sharing documents and files among multiple networks. However, when governmental officials with important national security information on their computers engage in file sharing, secure information can easily be leaked unintentionally, with potentially disastrous consequences.
Last week NBC News reported such a leak, in which engineering and communications information about Marine One, President Barack Obamas helicopter, was found at an IP address in Tehran, Iran. The leaked file was a file containing blueprints and avionics package for Marine One, and it was tracked back from Tehran to a defense contractors computer in Bethesda, Maryland. Also included in the leaked file was information about the cost of the helicopter. NBC also reported that Pakistan, Yemen, Qatar, and China are also in possession of this information, and tend to search for similar information on peer-to-peer networks.
When an individual downloads and uses a file-sharing program, other users of the program no matter where they are in the world have access to files on the new users computer. Most of these programs have settings that the user can apply, restricting sharing of certain folders on your computer. However, given the events of last week, a great discussion of the irresponsibility that led to the security breach has ensued, questioning the use and regulation of peer-to-peer networking technology, including discussion of a bill the Federal Trade Commission would like to see ratified, known as H.R. 1319 or the Informed P2P User Act with the goal of making it clearer to users of peer-to-peer programs what files the program will share, and to obtain consent from the user before making those files available on the peer-to-peer network. The Informed P2P User Act is rather straightforward in its wording, its aim is to prevent the inadvertent disclosure of information on a computer through the use of certain peer-to-peer file sharing software without first providing notice and obtaining consent from the owner or authorized user of the computer. However, technology lobbying groups such as TechAmerica, the Center for Democracy & Technology and the Computer & Communications Industry Association are opposed to the Informed P2P User Act, because they fear that if a bill such as this is passed, more bills will be passed in the future that regulate the use of software, and that it is all contextual. In a letter to congress dated May 4, 2009, several groups argued that the Informed P2P User Act would broadly apply to many different applications and Web sites that appear to be beyond the intended scope of the bill.
Indeed, the ramifications of this bill are both unsettling and comforting, in a sense. The idea that the government is encroaching on software territory is ominous, but one potential result of the Informed P2P User Act is that those file-sharers with illegal media on their computers, such as child pornography, may more often opt not to share the content (as a result of being more informed on how to control what is and is not shared), as law enforcement officials often access peer-to-peer programs to find sex offenders. That could crack down on the number of people who download material of this nature for the first time.
However, for the rest of the file-sharers, without a doubt, no information is more sensitive than that held within systems belonging to high government officials, such as President Obama (and his helicopter), and it seems rather unnecessary to write a law meant to protect information of that matter and apply it to the rest of the populace. What do I care if someone I dont know in Kazakhstan sees a picture of a cake I was proud enough to take a picture of?
