- Role of Government And Private Corporations Commercial Gains
Opinions on topical issues from thought leaders, columnists and editors.
Most of these users voluntarily share personal data far beyond what is needed, for example, posting locations, preferences, routines, and sometimes even sensitive information like their children's school details, vaccination records, or holiday plans.
As of January 1, 2025, Malaysia recorded 25.1 million social media users, making it one of the most connected populations in the region.
If there is real concern about data being misused, then platforms that profit from mass data harvesting should be examined with equal, if not greater, intensity.
Facebook once claimed it would never sell user data, yet it infamously shared user data with Cambridge Analytica. This incident became a major scandal in global privacy discussions and involved not just basic data, but detailed personal information used for targeted political manipulation.
Ironically, while there is widespread concern over government or institutional data collection, little attention is paid to how private corporations such as Meta (Facebook), ByteDance (TikTok), and X (formerly Twitter) actively profile users for commercial gain.
One of the most overlooked realities in the digital age is this: there is no such thing as a free service.
Every time a user signs up for a 'free' app or platform, be it social media, navigation tools, or online games, it is an exchange. Users grant access to their personal data, including their usage patterns, preferences, device details, and even contacts, in return for these services.
Most people accept the terms and conditions without reading them, unknowingly agreeing to large-scale data collection.
Unlike the limited data gathered for national digital services for cybersecurity or to improve performance, tech giants build multi-billion-dollar empires on the back of detailed personal data profiles.
Question raised
This raises the question: why is there so much concern when a government program or national platform transparently collects data for operational or protective purposes, while the daily exploitation by foreign platforms goes largely unchecked?
Tech giants like Google and Apple have perfected the art of data collection. Gmail, Google Docs, Google Drive, Apple iCloud, Siri, and Google Photos are all part of systems that continuously collect and analyze user data.
This includes not just basic data, but actual content like search terms, voice commands, photos, browse history, and even location.
Apple may advertise itself as being focused on privacy, but even its basic data (such as who you called, when, and for how long) is stored. Google, meanwhile, uses user behavior data for advertising, product development, and AI training.
Is the public really informed their data powers products?
Is the public truly informed about how much their data powers Google's AI models or Apple's products? More importantly, where is the outrage when these tech companies push updates that make it harder to opt out of data sharing?
It is necessary to ensure fairness, ethical governance, and consent in all forms of data collection, whether by governments or private companies. Nevertheless, we must avoid one-sided anger.
A responsible national policy that uses shared data to detect cybersecurity threats or improve digital services should not be attacked while corporate data collection for profit is ignored.
Not only that, data is also crucial in fighting online dangers. Protecting Malaysians in cyberspace is becoming more and more critical as online threats continue to grow.
Shared user data plays a key role in the fight against cybercrime, helping to automatically detect scams, fraud, and cyberbullying early on. With such incidents on the rise, using data responsibly is essential for public safety.
Role of government should not be forgotten
Nevertheless, for such programs to earn public confidence, the role of government oversight cannot be forgotten.
It is vital that the MCMC and all relevant agencies do their part by performing careful checks.
They must ensure that any data collected is stored and managed securely according to the highest international standards, making sure strong protections are in place to prevent data breaches. The public's trust depends on this strict oversight and accountability.
Instead of debating endlessly, Malaysians should support the government's efforts to build a convenient and safer digital environment for all. Malaysians should answer the question of whether the need to protect the safety of Malaysians is more important than unproven claims of data privacy breaches.
--BERNAMA
Professor Dr Selvakumar Manickam is the Director, Cybersecurity Research Center, Universiti Sains Malaysia
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
32 minutes ago
- The Sun
Customer slams KL Café over no-cash policy—Internet divided
A café in Kuala Lumpur has unintentionally stirred up an online debate after receiving a 1-star Google review from a dissatisfied customer who was upset that the establishment only accepts cashless payments. In a post on Threads, the café shared a screenshot of the review, where the customer expressed frustration over the policy: 'Never again. This business is a cashless business. Cash is still a legal tender in Malaysia and you must accept it.' ALSO READ: M'sian slams 10% service charge at QR code-only eateries, but some defend it The customer added, 'I do not support cashless business. Oh, and I just noticed you charged me the wrong bill. P.S. your coffee is ok.' The café, clearly puzzled by the harsh critique, responded with a caption reflecting its confusion: 'It's sad to see a customer leave a 1-star review not because the food wasn't good, overcooked, or due to bad service —but just because of our cashless policy. 'Yes, we're fully cashless for safety reasons and to reduce errors. 'Just wondering, how do you all feel about a cashless system like this? Let us know your thoughts,' it wrote. While many businesses have adopted digital payment systems to streamline operations and reduce human error, not all customers are on board. Online users were divided over the issue. Some supported the café's move, saying Malaysians need to keep pace with evolving technology. Others sympathised with the reviewer, arguing that the café should accommodate those less comfortable with digital payments. 'I've once had a situation where my phone had no line at all... and the shop only accepted e-wallet. I said that my phone was out of line and I could offer to pay cash.. they said they don't accept. Didn't end up buying. So they lose a sale,' one user called denflx commented. 'Did you clearly display a big sign at the entrance saying 'NO CASH ACCEPTED'? And when the customer was about to order, did you remind them again that you don't accept cash? If the customer was properly informed and still left that kind of review, then it wouldn't be fair,' amad_ecam wrote.
Barnama
5 hours ago
- Barnama
- Role of Government And Private Corporations Commercial Gains
Opinions on topical issues from thought leaders, columnists and editors. Most of these users voluntarily share personal data far beyond what is needed, for example, posting locations, preferences, routines, and sometimes even sensitive information like their children's school details, vaccination records, or holiday plans. As of January 1, 2025, Malaysia recorded 25.1 million social media users, making it one of the most connected populations in the region. If there is real concern about data being misused, then platforms that profit from mass data harvesting should be examined with equal, if not greater, intensity. Facebook once claimed it would never sell user data, yet it infamously shared user data with Cambridge Analytica. This incident became a major scandal in global privacy discussions and involved not just basic data, but detailed personal information used for targeted political manipulation. Ironically, while there is widespread concern over government or institutional data collection, little attention is paid to how private corporations such as Meta (Facebook), ByteDance (TikTok), and X (formerly Twitter) actively profile users for commercial gain. One of the most overlooked realities in the digital age is this: there is no such thing as a free service. Every time a user signs up for a 'free' app or platform, be it social media, navigation tools, or online games, it is an exchange. Users grant access to their personal data, including their usage patterns, preferences, device details, and even contacts, in return for these services. Most people accept the terms and conditions without reading them, unknowingly agreeing to large-scale data collection. Unlike the limited data gathered for national digital services for cybersecurity or to improve performance, tech giants build multi-billion-dollar empires on the back of detailed personal data profiles. Question raised This raises the question: why is there so much concern when a government program or national platform transparently collects data for operational or protective purposes, while the daily exploitation by foreign platforms goes largely unchecked? Tech giants like Google and Apple have perfected the art of data collection. Gmail, Google Docs, Google Drive, Apple iCloud, Siri, and Google Photos are all part of systems that continuously collect and analyze user data. This includes not just basic data, but actual content like search terms, voice commands, photos, browse history, and even location. Apple may advertise itself as being focused on privacy, but even its basic data (such as who you called, when, and for how long) is stored. Google, meanwhile, uses user behavior data for advertising, product development, and AI training. Is the public really informed their data powers products? Is the public truly informed about how much their data powers Google's AI models or Apple's products? More importantly, where is the outrage when these tech companies push updates that make it harder to opt out of data sharing? It is necessary to ensure fairness, ethical governance, and consent in all forms of data collection, whether by governments or private companies. Nevertheless, we must avoid one-sided anger. A responsible national policy that uses shared data to detect cybersecurity threats or improve digital services should not be attacked while corporate data collection for profit is ignored. Not only that, data is also crucial in fighting online dangers. Protecting Malaysians in cyberspace is becoming more and more critical as online threats continue to grow. Shared user data plays a key role in the fight against cybercrime, helping to automatically detect scams, fraud, and cyberbullying early on. With such incidents on the rise, using data responsibly is essential for public safety. Role of government should not be forgotten Nevertheless, for such programs to earn public confidence, the role of government oversight cannot be forgotten. It is vital that the MCMC and all relevant agencies do their part by performing careful checks. They must ensure that any data collected is stored and managed securely according to the highest international standards, making sure strong protections are in place to prevent data breaches. The public's trust depends on this strict oversight and accountability. Instead of debating endlessly, Malaysians should support the government's efforts to build a convenient and safer digital environment for all. Malaysians should answer the question of whether the need to protect the safety of Malaysians is more important than unproven claims of data privacy breaches. --BERNAMA Professor Dr Selvakumar Manickam is the Director, Cybersecurity Research Center, Universiti Sains Malaysia
Barnama
5 hours ago
- Barnama
- Ensuring Benefits For The Rakyat With Responsible Use Of Mobile Phone Data
Opinions on topical issues from thought leaders, columnists and editors. As someone deeply involved in nation building in the areas of network infrastructure and cybersecurity, I feel it is crucial to bring technical clarity to the Malaysian public regarding this issue and separating speculation from substantiated fact. Recent discussions surrounding the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission's (MCMC) Mobile Phone Data Program have stirred public debate, raising questions over privacy, cybersecurity, and the government's role in data stewardship. First and foremost, the data collected under the Mobile Phone Data Program is aggregated, anonymised, and devoid of any personally identifiable information (PII). To equate this program with intrusive surveillance is technically inaccurate and misleading. The data points collected are no different, if not significantly less granular, than the metadata routinely collected by global platforms like Google, Apple, Meta, and numerous other mobile apps for analytics, service optimisation, and targeted advertising. The data only provides generalised metadata such as signal strength, network usage trends, location area codes, and other non-personal metrics that can help our regulator assess mobile network performance, digital divide issues, and emergency response readiness. Legal and Ethical Boundaries Are Intact The Malaysian regulator, MCMC, in line with the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 and the Personal Data Protection Act 2010, operates within strict regulatory boundaries. This particular program does not collect names, phone numbers, call logs, browsing history, or message contents. Generally, the participating Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) are very cautious on sharing their data yet, they have had no issues in working closely with MCMC on this project. Furthermore, access to the metadata is limited to selected analytical tools within the Commission, with no commercial or third-party exposure. This makes the dataset fundamentally different from the kind of data typically vulnerable to misuse or monetisation in commercial tech ecosystems. Strategic Importance in a Digital Nation From a technical and policy standpoint, the Mobile Phone Data Program is strategically very important for national digital infrastructure planning. With Malaysia advancing toward wider 5G deployment and smart city initiatives, regulators require real-time, evidence-based insights into mobile coverage, device density, and population mobility to guide resource allocation, spectrum planning, and emergency readiness. For instance, during natural disasters or public health crises, such data can significantly improve our authorities' responses, enabling faster and more targeted assistance being provided to the needy. Several advanced economies, including South Korea, Finland, and Estonia, have long adopted similar anonymised data programs providing effective public benefits and without any complains about infringing on personal privacy. Addressing the Misinformation Ecosystem It is unfortunate that a narrative of distrust has taken root, largely fuelled by misinformation and a poor understanding of network-level data analytics. In the absence of context, the public is led to fear a 'surveillance state,' even when the technical facts clearly indicate that no such risk exists. MCMC's proactive move to engage cybersecurity experts, telcos, and the public through open communication is the correct path forward. Transparency, ongoing stakeholder dialogue, and third-party audits should be encouraged, not to defend against wrongdoing, but to reinforce trust in a system that is technically sound and ethically implemented. Final Thoughts The integrity of our digital ecosystem must be safeguarded, not only from cyber threats but from disinformation that can undermine our national progress. The Mobile Phone Data Program is not a breach of privacy but instead, an important tool for digital nation-building, designed with checks and balances that preserves user anonymity and protects public trust. Let us not conflate good governance with intrusion, or precaution with paranoia. This part of Malaysia's digital journey uses the carefully redacted data to ensure better mobile coverage and connectivity, amongst other things, to bring better comfort and telco services to the Malaysian public. --BERNAMA Prof Emeritus Dr Sureswaran Ramadass is the Chairman of APAC IPv6 Council & Cybersecurity Subject Matter Expert
