I usually don’t post about current events, but something happened the other day and I thought I should speak up (in case anyone gives a shit about what I have to say).

UK Prime Minister David Cameron aimed to capitalize on the horrific events in Paris last week by announcing that if he was re-elected he’d try to push through a law which basically makes using encryption illegal. He did this under the pretense of protecting us from the terrorists - poking citizens fear muscles - arguing that the bad guys should have no place to hide online where their communications cannot be read and analyzed by intelligence services. It’s interesting how he (and other politicians) phrase these proposals, in this case meaning that if you don’t agree with them, the insinuation is that you support terrorists. Obviously this is a false dichotomy.

Here are some thoughts on why I think encryption is crucial to a functioning society and why taking it away is criminally short sighted, and frankly, Orwellian. Hello secret police?

I suspect that many politicians around the world will try to call for similar things in the near future, rushing through draconian laws while citizenries are consumed by fear and hysteria. 


ENCRYPTION PROTECTS ORDINARY PEOPLE

Encryption helps protect so many parts of our every day lives, from usernames and passwords, to bank accounts, medical records, private intimate messages, photos, important files, purchase histories, identity information, voice calls and so much more. If it were taken away, pretty much any government, hacker, criminal or troll would be able to access this info if they tried hard enough. Can you imagine the absolute chaos that would ensue for MILLIONS of people if that came to pass? Imagine the iCloud or Playstation hacks for every service and product you use. Stolen money, identity theft, blackmail, fraud, it’d be out of control.

Governments have also proposed allowing secret backdoors to be installed into apps which only they can gain access to. The problem is that this fundamentally cripples security meaning that other malicious actors with enough time and skill would be able to find these holes too and exploit them.

Banning encryption technology basically indicates to all the shitheads in the world that all the people within a certain geographical area are easy pickings.


ENCRYPTION PROTECTS BUSINESSES

On top of all the above points, encryption plays a vital role for businesses too, allowing protection against industrial espionage and corrupt practices like insider trading.

Do you think many businesses will want to operate in countries where all their important financial and operational information is potentially available to anyone? There would be much less incentive for them to stay in such a hostile environment.


TERRORISTS ARE FALLIBLE IDIOTS

The media often portrays terrorists as cold and calculating anti-humans who plot their mischief in complete privacy, so you never know when they may attack - further flaming the hysteria in a lot of peoples minds. The truth is that they’re often mentally unstable and act irrationally and idiotically. Do you think almost any terrorist has a solid grasp of operation security (OPSEC) or information security (INFOSEC)? I hardly know anything about those subjects, but even with my limited knowledge, I understand that it is almost impossible to be 100% secure at all times, and only the most technically savvy and disciplined would be able to achieve it.

That means, even if terrorists do encrypt their message content, they are still prone to other operational failings that will expose them to security services. As the saying goes, the weakest part of any security system are humans. They may forget to turn on encryption, they might accidentally leak an IP address or send a single unencrypted data packet, they may expose their usage patterns, they may download viruses that infect their systems, they may use the wrong sim card, or lose their phone, whatever it is, there is a lot they could do wrong. On top of that, you see that many of these people also have histories of being outspoken in their views, often bragging or taunting on social media or shouting in the streets like crazy people.

Security services have more than enough information already to find these people and adding oceans more data is only going to slow down their efforts in analyzing it. Plus, if encryption was banned, the terrorists and criminals would surely just change their tactics, making the banning a pointless exercise.

Have you ever seen the comedy film Four Lions? It follows a group of bumbling terrorist fools in the UK and the litany of mistakes and stupid choices they make, culminating in their failed terrorist attack. It may be a work of fiction, but the writer Chris Morris has stated many times that the inspiration for a lot of what happens is loosely based on real bumbling terrorists, and there are a lot to choose from. Look it up.


NO ENCRYPTION = NO PRIVACY

Privacy is absolutely vital for truly free expression. We understand that in this day and age, most of what we say and do on the Internet is recorded and stored. Can you imagine what that’d look like if EVERYTHING, and I mean absolutely everything was automatically scooped up by anyone who had the skill and resources? How would you interact with your friends if every private message or skype chat was available for all to see, including, trolls, hackers, criminals and even your other friends whom you may have been talking about? Would you change what you say?

Banning encryption would be like trying to protect your freedom of expression, by taking away your freedom of expression. Totally illogical.


DOUBLE STANDARDS

So let’s imagine if this dystopian nightmare came true and encryption was banned. Does that mean all those who make up governments would not be able to use it? Don’t be silly peasant! It’d be one set of rules for us and another for them, meaning there’d be an ever greater rift between the rulers and those they are supposed to be serving. Would members of parliament or senators be allowed to use it? Or what about local government? What about their families? Their doctors or lawyers? When you ban something, where do you draw the line?


THERE ARE (MANY) MORE OF US THAN THEM

The last thing I’ll say is that we have to remember a basic fact. There are a TINY number of terrorists compared to the general population. There may be thousands of ‘potential’ terrorists in a population of tens of millions, and the actual amount who carry out attacks can be counted on both hands. Is it really worth destroying the freedom of tens or hundreds of MILLIONS of ordinary peaceful people over a handful of idiots?


––
BY CHRIS ROBINSON