This could be the year that government protects people's privacy, except they don't want it.
Society's lip service demands privacy, when in reality, they love the services, devices, apps and that brings convenience they crave.
People perceive the government challenges their privacy, like facial recognition in an airport, opposed to when they spill their guts on their own free will via social media platforms or home devices.
Houston cybersecurity attorney Shawn Tuma said all sides are struggling to find the government's role in balancing restrictions of private devices that the public wants.
"We've seen efforts at the national level through the federal government to come up with privacy laws that never seem to pass, because they can't get broad based support," said Tuma.
Unlike other issues, there's no clear partisan stance on privacy and security.
He said it's the fickle nature of Americans.
"On the one hand they're wanting to maintain their privacy, but on the other, they're wanting to use the very things that take away their privacy, and that's a very difficult position for the government to be in," said Tuma.
He said the federal government has tried to come up with laws that never seem to get passed because they lack broad-based support. Yet, he doesn't believe privacy will take a back burner because security is integral with privacy. All of the cybersecurity awareness is tied into privacy and protection of private information.
"You can have security without privacy. But you cannot have privacy without security of data because if the data is not secure, it's no longer private, because it's going to be exposed," said Tuma.
Tuma doesn't believe government hasn't done more because the big tech lobby's role.
"Because big tech is in a position, they don't really know what they want, either," said Tuma.
There's no easy answer. What can the government do?
The feds have to find the balance on appropriate restrictions on manufacturing and use of devices.
Even liberal California leaders passed California Consumer Privacy Act, which is even more restrictive than the EU's GDPR.