The End of Privacy

For the 25th Anniversary issue of Waters, we polled about three-dozen senior executives and asked them what the most important technology of the near-future would be. It was an incredibly interesting exercise due to the wide array of responses: artificial intelligence (AI), quantum computing, the Internet of Things (IoT), blockchain and augmented/virtual reality, were all mentioned. 

I have absolutely no problem with those responses and others, but I was surprised that there wasn’t more chatter around cybersecurity. I could be missing some responses—I didn’t see every one as we only had so much space in the magazine—but I think that only Thomas Zeeb, head of securities and exchanges at SIX, focused on cyber. 

Much like how dopers will always be ahead of those trying to keep performance-enhancing drugs out of sports, people and institutions will always be playing a game of catch-up, as there are just too many entry points for hackers to exploit. 

Quite frankly, those previously mentioned technologies will help to exacerbate the cyber problem. Quantum computing will change encryption forever. IoT devices will create exponentially more entry points while putting potential listening devices in every room of every house and office. AI will help hackers to be more efficient and targeted in their attacks. While difficult, blockchains are not as impervious to hacks as some will have you believe.   

Perhaps people stayed away from cybersecurity because they know it’s such an uphill battle and is one of defense, rather than using technology to improve the firm. 

Unseen Watchers

For this issue of Waters, my colleague Josephine Gallagher examined how the use of biometrics and identification technologies are increasingly being used at capital markets firms after finding great success at retail banks. It’s a fascinating look at these nascent technologies and offers a glimpse into the future of security. It’s also a bit unsettling. At one point she writes about a company called BioCatch and how it provides software that tracks identifying traits, such as how people normally type, how they normally use a mouse, how they input data or communicate with third parties. It’s intriguing, but it’s also weird to think that a software program can learn my ticks and traits, which, for me, are basically unknown or unacknowledged. 

I’ve banged on about this previously in this space, but I find it insane that people submit their DNA to sites like 23andMe.com or Ancestry.com. As we’ve learned with the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica debacle, we often don’t know how our personal information—which we willingly sign away by signing up to social media or shopping sites—is being used by those institutions. 

I voluntarily use biometrics to access my phone and financial accounts. But I’ve increasingly been concerned about how my fingerprint information is being stored and who can see it. Iris scanning and facial recognition technology is creepy. Who can see this information? Can it be sold to other third parties? Government agencies? How secure is it? Do these firms have top-of-the-line cybersecurity defenses? Or is cyber something that they pay lip service to? 

We willingly allow listening devices into our homes. We willingly hand over our DNA and fingerprints to entities we don’t really know. Where does this end?

The Lesser of Two Evils

I am not normally one for government intervention, as I fall more in the deregulation section of the Venn diagram. With that said, I do feel that Congress—or, if you prefer, Parliament—needs to start seriously addressing how these companies are  using and selling citizens’ data and how strong their cyber defenses are. I know that it’s tough in today’s chaotic political environment to think about something that isn’t immediately important, but it also doesn’t matter where you are on the political spectrum—this concerns you very much whether or not you think Trump is making America great again or if you think he’s the Antichrist.