Attorney General William Barr gave a speech on encryption at the International Conference on Cyber Security at Fordham University on July 23 that went over the usual law enforcement arguments for exceptional access.
Latest in Encryption
Last fall, Lawfare published a piece by Ian Levy and Crispin Robinson of GCHQ entitled Principles for a More Informed Exceptional Access Debate.
Encryption and its effects on law enforcement’s access to data seem to occupy a perennial place in the headlines (and on Lawfare as well). The two of us have been working on it for years. The subject is often highly contested, but the fierce discussion has ignored some critical factors. One of those is how changing usage patterns and technologies will affect how law enforcement can—or can’t—obtain access.
The Massachusetts High Court Rules That State Can Compel Password Decryption in Commonwealth v. Jones
According to the Pew Foundation, most Americans lock their cell phones, creating an obstacle for some law enforcement investigations—most notably, the FBI in its 2016 standoff with Apple over access to the San Bernardino attacker’s iPhone—and especially for state authorities, which have fewer resources than
Last Tuesday, the U.S. attorney’s office in Massachusetts announced charges against dozens of parents, college sports coaches and test-prep teachers with in a scheme to win admission to big name universities including Georgetown, Yale and Stanford. Of particular interest for this blog posting is the following excerpt from one of the charging documents.
On March 6, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced a long-term road map to turn Facebook into a “privacy-focused communications platform.” His “principles” for this transformation include auto-deleting old user content and choosing “not to build data centers in countries that have a track record of violating human rights like privacy or freedom of expression,” even if that gets Facebook blocked from lucrative markets such as China or Russia.
The most recent purportedly serious proposal by a Western government to force technology companies to provide access to the content of encrypted communications comes from Ian Levy and Crispin Robinson of the Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, the U.K.’s equivalent of the National Security Agency.
The so-called Crypto Wars have been going on for 25 years now.
Lawfare has run a series of posts concerning exceptional access.