Digital Contact Tracing: Ethicality and Reinforced Surveillance

Saurish Srivastava / December 29, 2020

10 minutes / –––


The rapid spread of the novel coronavirus has left governments and scientists frantic to drastically flatten the curve of the pandemic. Many researchers have developed an automated version of the traditional contact tracing; one that uses Bluetooth and GPS technologies to map the spread of the virus. Though, this digital contact tracing may be problematic in regard to data privacy, ethicality, and surveillance. This paper takes a view at those focal points and explains why governments need to create an infrastructure prior to implementing these methodologies.

1 – Introduction

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), or commonly known as the novel coronavirus, has created an international outbreak with death tolls soaring well beyond 1.5 million [13], demanding researchers and scientists to develop techniques to slow the spread of the virus. Among these methodologies involving government co-operation, is contact tracing: “a well established part of the management of infectious disease outbreaks, which aims to interrupt chains of infection transmission (eg, through quarantining contacts), and has formed part of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in many countries” [3]. Contact tracing operates by accurately modeling an individual’s interactions with other ‘contacts’ and tracking individuals considered probable to be at risk of the virus. To decrease chances of transmission, individuals who may be at risk are asked to take a certain set of precautions (i.e., quarantine).The benefits of contact tracing have been seen in South Korea, who implemented a meticulous contact tracing program and drastically reduced the spread of the virus [17][12].

Fig. 1. Country-oriented coronavirus deaths, December 6 [13]
Fig. 1. Country-oriented coronavirus deaths, December 6 [13]

However, the rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has raised questions of how to increase the speed, accuracy, and implementation of contact tracing. Scholars have now been advocating for governments to utilize an automated digital contact tracing [16]. The application of Bluetooth and other unique technologies to increase speeds and the privatization of data have been the focal point of digital contact tracing, which can be seen with Apple and Google’s Privacy-Preserving Contact Tracing [1] or MIT’s Private Automated Contact Tracing (PACT) [11]. With 40% of Americans not willing to contribute to manual contact tracing [14], far more would not consider digital contact tracing. Although these applications boast the privacy of data, many questions have been poised on the ethicality of these applications. I want to discuss these claims of ethicality and how digital contact tracing reinforces the surveillance of civilians.

2 – Ethical Concerns and Reinforced Surveillance

There has been a lot of discussion for whether governments should be implementing digital contact tracing as in South Korea. Supporters of digital contact tracing cite South Korea as a successful implementation of digital contact tracing. Yet, they fail to understand that law had a huge part to play in South Korea’s endeavor, not to mention public support [6]. They claim that the benefits are extraordinary and would benefit governments in short-circuiting the virus’s high numbers. But there are larger questions: would it be mandatory? Will it work if people opt out? Where is the data stored? Who has access to it? What happens with the data once the pandemic is over? Who is excluded from digital contact tracing? What happens for people who do not have mobile devices? There are a plethora of questions that need to be answered, thus why even Apple and Google explaining that their technology cannot be used by governments [9].

2.1 – The Problem: It's Keeping Track of Us

Although many of the questions posed above can be simply answered with discussion and thought, the questions regarding data privacy. The era of digitalization is here, and digital contact tracing is the epitome of datafication: “the process by which subjects, objects, and practices are transformed into digital data.” [21] Digital contact tracing renders the actions of individuals as “machine-readable, quantifiable data for the purpose of aggregation and analysis” [21]. These ethical concerns remain unanswered: what data is tracked, where is the data stored, and where does it go? GPSand Bluetooth based apps are intrusive by tracking all movements (i.e., visiting the doctor’s office or local supermarket)[8]. The storage of data at a “central server, which is managed by your state or national health authority” [4], though, prompts another question.

The biggest concern is that of constant surveillance. Histories of anti-Blackness and the deaths of Breonna Taylor,George Floyd, and so many important others highlight that the United States has been an imperial monster. Apps designed ‘with privacy in mind’ is how they are broadcasted, but these programs openly admit that, “as required by law,” data can be used by agencies like ICE and the law enforcement [23]. With no infrastructure in place to prevent this, it is bound to occur. In fact, it already has – Minnesota Police has used contact tracing technology to track protestors [15]. Introducing methods of mass surveillance that analyze every action is inherently problematic and is a governmental framework that should be rejected. This is what I see as digital contact tracing’s largest problem. But, despite all this, I’m still rather optimistic: if there was to be a transition to an automated contact tracing, it would necessitate a cautious transition with laws and strict rules, to avoid events such as Facebook’s data-selling scandal.

2.2 – The Problem: Reach

One of the only, but extremely crucial, requirements for automated contact tracing is a mobile device that is compatible with the technology utilized in these apps. Without it, nothing will work, which already begs the question of how digital contact tracing works with other people around who do not have mobile devices. Many people may not carry their phones on them when running small errands in which they may be in contact with others, and automated contact tracing is not able to recognize that. Almost 2 billion mobile device users [2] [22] do not have the adequate technology to participate in contact tracing, which reinforces a generic hierarchy of the higher class and the lower class (higher class having access to the best technology and the lower class not). Refugees have to change their SIM cards often for safety and would “thwart contact-tracing apps" [22] [10]. In conjunction with large portions of homeless populations and underprivileged communities [22] [18] [19] [7], automated contact tracing would serve as a threat. By analyzing numbers that don’t accurately represent the population, the system would generate false negatives: “where the app fails to warn users even though they were in fact exposed” [22]. False positives, where the app wrongly determines a person to be quarantined or sent to the hospital risks income inequality for low-wage workers [22] [20] and deportation for undocumented immigrants [22] [5]. If these trends continue, a contact-tracing app would not be able to help in reducing the spread of the virus and would rather strengthen inequalities.

3 – Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a difficult question on policymakers, governments, and researchers. Most are stuck with a conundrum on the question of public safety and health concerns. But by doing so, they misunderstand the drastic effects methodologies like digital contact tracing can have on different communities through continued surveillance and lack of resources, raising questions of ethicality. Through a discussion of these crucial points, governments may be able to devise a solution that doesn’t spark discomfort, but rather public support.


[1] Apple and Google. 2020. Privacy-Preserving Contact Tracing.

[2] Tim Bradshaw. 2020. 2bn phones cannot use Google and Apple contact-tracing tech.

[3] Isobel Braithwaite, Thomas Callender, Miriam Bullock, and Robert W. Aldridge. 2020. Automated and partly automated contact tracing: a systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19. The Lancet Digital Health 2, 11 (2020), e607–e621.

[4] Cat Ferguson.2020. Do digital contact tracing apps work? Here’s what you need to know.

[5] Karmina L. Fonseca. 2020. Undocumented and coronavirus: ‘No one will record your information or ask about immigration status’.

[6] J. Brian Kim. 2020. Lessons for America: How South Korean Authorities Used Law to Fight the Coronavirus.

[7] Fran Kritz. 2019. Expired, Lost and Stolen: Cell Phones, Critical for Homeless People, Can be Tough to Get and Keep.

[8] Christine (MA) Lehmann. 2020. Privacy Concerns Hindering Digital Contact Tracing.

[9] Kif Leswing. 2020. Government can’t force people to use tech Google and Apple created to trace coronavirus cases.

[10] Carleen Maitland and Ying Xu. 2015. A Social Informatics Analysis of Refugee Mobile Phone Use: A Case Study of Zaaatari Syrian Refugee Camp. SSRN Electronic Journal(2015).

[11] Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 2020. PACT: Private Automated Contact Tracing.

[12] Kim S. Max. 2020. Seoul’s Radical Experiment in Digital Contact Tracing.

[13] Esteban Ortiz-Ospina Max Roser, Hannah Ritchie and Joe Hasell. 2020. Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19). Our World in Data(2020).

[14] Colleen McClain and Lee Rainie. 2020. The Challenges of Contact Tracing as U.S. Battles COVID-19.Pew Research Center1, October (2020), 1–65.

[15] Alfred Ng. 2020. Contact tracers concerned police tracking protesters will hurt COVID-19 aid.

[16] University of Oxford. 2020. Infectious disease experts provide evidence for a coronavirus mobile app for instant contact tracing.

[17] Youngjoon Park, Youngjune Choe, Ok Park, Shin Young Park, Young Man Kim, Jieun Kim, Sanghui Kweon, Yeonhee Woo, Jin Gwack, Seong Sun Kim, Jin Leejunghee Hyun, Boyeong Ryu, Yoon Sukjang, Hwami Kim, Seung Hwan Shin, Seonju Yi, Sangeun Lee, Hee Kyoung Kim, Hyeyoung Lee, Yeowon Jin, Eunmi Park, Seung Woo Choi, Miyoung Kim, Jeongsuk Song, Si Won Choi, Dongwook Kim, Byoung Hak Jeon, Hyosoon Yoo, and Eun Kyeongjeongm. 2020. Contact Tracing during Coronavirus Disease Outbreak, South Korea, 2020.Emerging Infectious Diseases26, 10 (2020), 2465–2468.

[18] Maria C. Raven, Lauren M. Kaplan, Marina Rosenberg, Lina Tieu, David Guzman, and Margot Kushel. 2018. Mobile phone, computer, and internet use among older homeless adults: Results from the HOPE HOME cohort study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth6, 12 (2018).

[19] Harmony Rhoades, Suzanne L. Wenzel, Eric Rice, Hailey Winetrobe, and Benjamin Henwood. 2017. No digital divide? Technology use among homeless adults.Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless26, 1 (2017), 73–77.

[20] Alana Semuels. 2020. ’If We Don’t Work, We Don’t Get Paid.’ How the Coronavirus Is Exposing Inequality Among America’s Workers.

[21] Clare Southerton. 2020.Datafication. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 1–4.

[22] Artificial Intelligence Toh, Amos (Senior Researcher, Human Rights), and Digital Rights) Brown, Deborah (Senior Researcher and Advocate. 2020. How Digital Contact Tracing for COVID-19 Could Worsen Inequality.

[23] New Test York and Trace Corps. 2020. Tracing : What to Expect.Test and Trace Corps1, June (2020), 1–3.