Latest in Privacy Paradox
In a paper we are making public today, we go beyond private right of action and preemption to consider enforcement frameworks outside the privacy field.
A new report shows the widespread use by law enforcement of tools that circumvent encryption barriers.
The Senate Commerce Committee recently wrapped up a “paper hearing” on big data and the coronavirus pandemic in which lawmakers and private experts weighed how to balance public health efforts against privacy risks.
Recent stories in Cyberscoop and TechCrunch indicate that the Department of Homeland Security is asking Congress to grant the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) the power to issue administrative subpoenas to internet service providers (ISPs).
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence released partially redacted documents related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC) authorization of the 2018 certifications under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The FISC initially approved most parts of the certification, but ruled that other aspects of the FBI protocols concerning information regarding U.S. persons were inadequate.
Background
This is part of a series of essays from the Crypto 2018 Workshop on Encryption and Surveillance.
This is part of a series of essays from the Crypto 2018 Workshop on Encryption and Surveillance.
In August 2018, the leading international academic conference on cryptography hosted a Workshop on Encryption and Surveillance. The workshop explored both legal and technical aspects of the ongoing debate over the impact of strong encryption and law enforcement surveillance capabilities. The workshop was co-chaired by Tim Edgar (Brown University), Joan Feigenbaum (Yale University), and me. As we described it at the time:
This is part of a series of essays from the Crypto 2018 Workshop on Encryption and Surveillance.
In any discussion of cyber security, details matter.