Is the price for protecting public and private networks too high? In a project internally called "Cyber Initiative", NSA together with the Department of Homeland Security and other federal US agencies are planned to monitor networks in order to defend them against unauthorized intruders. For the NSA this would mean a rearrangement of its charter, because up to now it's responsible for protecting gouvernmental infrastructure.

Whoever is engaged in computer and network security knows: protecting means monitoring. To efficiently protect a network all incoming and outcoming traffic has to be monitored. One would need few imagination to fancy the uproar of citizens realizing that their internet traffic and harddisk content is scanned by intelligence agencies. Since gouvernments are always hungry for data the next step would be a total control for other purposes than terror prevention (tax offices are very interested in your ebay sales!).

If this will happen, terrorist don't have to go further. They will have won their struggle, because we'll live in a world whose main communication paths are widely controlled by gouvernments. This would be a step towards a strong, if not total state where putting the wrong words in your mouth is dangerous for you, your family and your friends. A world you have to watch every step you do, because the web and its controllers won't forget anything. This might not happen immediately. People will unlearn the value of privacy over a longer period. On some day, they won't know it at all and the last remembrance of privacy will be closing the toilet door behind you. No need for terrorists to throw bombs further. It can't get worse than that.

In the end, this is a dilemma. It's good, if gouvernments care about computer security to defend even normal citizens against crackers, phishers, spammers and other crap. To give up privacy is indeed a bitter pill and this price is much too high.

But surely this is just my gloominess. (Source)