Encryption

In the Age of the Embarrassing Leak, Can We All Admit That Encryption Is a Good Thing?

Government officials arguing against privacy protections are learning their importance in the most embarrassing ways possible.

|

State Dept

Even the likes of surveillance-friendly presidential candidates might be thinking fond thoughts about the benefits of privacy and encryption after the events of recent days. It's one thing to have your friends in business found out for turning people's personal communications over to your friends in government. It's quite more troubling when you're Hillary Clinton and your own missives are hacked and reveal your strong belief in the value of telling the voting public one thing while firmly planning on doing another.

And it's little consolation that America's drunk uncle, Donald Trump, staggered through the headlines in the form of old recordings of his grope-y locker room shenanigans to briefly distract some public attention from such cynical musings. Those leaks are out there, and opposing candidates can't always be counted on to provide such clickbait-y counterprogramming.

But will the embarrassed powers-that-be extend their concern to the rest of us? It's entirely too easy to imagine America's political class responding to the summer, and fall (and preceding years) of inconvenient leaks with special dispensations only for the anointed. As for the rest of us… we'll always have Yahoo.

Yahoo, of course, is the aging Internet giant that apparently still offers email services—though probably not for long. Demand for its offerings is likely to shrivel in the wake of revelations that Yahoo's senior management succumbed to government demands that it search all of its customers' incoming messages for anything that might interest the sort of people who sit in Beltway-area offices, eavesdropping on the world. The company did so without challenge and it bypassed its own security department, the head of which resigned in protest.

In a post-Snowden world, many people want to know what the hell Yahoo's leadership was thinking by complying with the sort of snooping that Apple gained public kudos by defying. Yahoo may even have increased the risk of hacking by creating a backdoor for the government. Hacking of the sort that was revealed right before we found out about the snooping, that is.

It's almost as if punching holes in privacy protections weakens them across the board.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) demanded to know the government's rationale for the Yahoo surveillance and warned that "federal law is being interpreted in ways that many Americans would find surprising and troubling."

But it's not clear that laws and even their most reasonable interpretations are much of a bar to such intrusions into people's private communications.

The NSA's bulk telephone metadata collection was found to be thoroughly illegal once revealed to the public by whistleblower Edward Snowden and brought to the courts. "We hold that the text of section 215 cannot bear the weight the government asks us to assign to it, and that it does not authorize the telephone metadata program," concluded a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

And Germany's BND spy agency, which self-righteously reduced contacts with the NSA out of a professed respect for privacy, was later shown to be quietly, and quite illegally, engaged in mass surveillance of its own against the German population. "These infringements of constitutional rights are conducted without any legal basis and thus harm the constitutional right of informational self-determination of [innocent] people," announced the country's Federal Data Protection Commission.

Both incursions into people's private lives survived for years behind the scenes, succumbing more (to the extent they actually go away, rather than continuing behind the scenes) to public exposure than to legal barriers. Totally illegal the snooping may have been, but it would have certainly continued if it hadn't been publicized.

Despite public uproars over indiscriminate surveillance efforts, Yahoo is only one company trying to win that public's business that hasn't learned that many people value their privacy and don't want it compromised by the services with which they deal. Neither, apparently, has Facebook. The social media giant recently rolled out "secret conversations" for its Messenger app, but they're not necessarily as secret as promised. The company assures users, "If you think a message you've received in a secret conversation goes against our Community Standards, you can report it. When you report a secret conversation, recent messages from that conversation will be decrypted and sent securely from your device to our Help Team for review."

Presumably, they could decrypt it by government order, too. Or hackers might just get access to the back door and help themselves.

There's no such thing as absolutely assured privacy, unfortunately. But that doesn't mean we have to choose communications techniques that are deliberately compromised from the get-go. Services like the messaging app Signal at least try to keep personal information secure from snoops. ProtonMail makes the same effort for email, though some potential vulnerabilities have been found. They and other efforts start from the premise that it should at least be difficult for personal data to be intercepted—even if it's by government agencies.

Government officials (and would-be officeholders) push back on that idea. FBI Director James Comey can't shut up about how much he hates anything that makes it hard for him to steam open the nation's envelopes. Presidential hopeful and national embarrassment Donald Trump called for a boycott of Apple for refusing to help the FBI crack its phones' security. Our horrifyingly likely next president, Hillary Clinton, famously called for a "Manhattan-like project" to crack encryption.

Who knows whether Comey will ever change his tune? But both presidential candidates probably have a stronger appreciation for privacy these days. Clinton, in particular, may have had second thoughts about encryption after so much of her own correspondence spilled out across the internet.

If so, maybe we'll find out by digging through the next batch of her email to get swiped and released to the public.

NEXT: Democrats Were Worried About Rand Paul, Leaked Email Reveals

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. If you’ve done nothing wrong then you should have nothing to hide.

  2. Anytime a politician uses the “Manhattan Project” metaphor, you should really, really ask yourself if you want to go there.

    1. So many “Manhattan Projects” and so few Hiroshimas.

    2. It’s like if she said, “We need to buckle down and build our own Auschwitz”.

    3. It also speaks to her complete ignorance of the fundamentals of encryption. If you think you can Crack encryption like the science of nuclear physics, you don’t understand the nature of encryption.

      1. A more appropriate metaphor would have been the Enigma codebreaking project, but it is a safe bet that they don’t understand encryption.

  3. Government officials should be prohibited from using encryption. Leaks are good.

  4. Government officials should be prohibited from using encryption. Leaks are good.

    1. Especially when it’s the personal information of millions of Americans held in those government databases…

      Somehow I don’t think that’s what you meant, but where’s the line, and who determines what information lies on what side of the line? Who gets to audit that?

      1. Somehow I don’t think that’s what you meant,

        What I said was that government officials shouldn’t be allowed to use encryption, which in this context obviously refers to their E-mails and documents. There should be an allowance for keeping such content private for a limited time (say, a decade), but then it should all be public.

        Since you raise the question of what should happen to government databases, presumably referring to tax records, police records, etc., I believe that should also be public. In fact, most of it already is: most property taxes, arrest records, legal proceedings. We should extend that principle to corporate and regulatory filings, income taxes, reimbursements for public officials, etc. That serves two purposes: first, it makes government more open; second, it limits the enthusiasm with which people will embrace bigger and more intrusive government.

  5. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) demanded to know the government’s rationale for the Yahoo surveillance and warned that “federal law is being interpreted in ways that many Americans would find surprising and troubling.”

    I have an idea, Senator. Don’t craft shoddy and ambiguous legislation that opens the door for enforcers to run wild.

    1. Yeah, but to these assholes “shall not be infringed” is a phrase that’s open to interpretation.

      1. It’s not the fringe, it’s the penumbra!

    2. Doesn’t have to be ambiguous. Just look how “Congress shall make no law” and “shall not be infringed” have been interpreted.

      1. Where does it say Congress shall make no regulation? Hmmmm, wise guy?

        1. Where does it say unaccountable executive agencies can create regulations with the power of law?

          1. In the ACA.

  6. I’m all for encryption but we all know that the end result of this will be governments declaring the very use of encryption to be a crime, except when they use it of course. Maybe some exceptions will be made for businesses and the like but for private citizens acting on their own behalf the future isn’t looking too good.

    1. ^This.

      An uninformed and compliant herd cant be allowed unmonitored communication.

      When has our ruling class ever expressed or acted as if they were not members of the John Mill school of thought? That asymmetrical standards apply? That they should be free to do as they please and not be held accountable while the great herd of ordinary people are held to strict accountability? They really do see themselves as elite while in fact they just don’t measure up.

      I am still laughing about the Bill Ivey email where he said there were forces at work that just cant be understood (people aren’t doing as they are told). What an idiot.

  7. I thought embarrassing leaks is what Depends is for?

  8. Talking about encryption like its some dangerous new technology is crazy stupid. Pgp is a change of degree, not of kind. Without that particular method really motivated people could still encrypt their email in all sorts of ways. The marginal encryption users aren’t the terrorists. And anyhow, how would banning pgp work at all? I don’t think that’s doable.

    1. pssst. “The cake is in the oven.” repeat. “The cake is in the oven.”

  9. Our horrifyingly likely next president, Hillary Clinton, famously called for a “Manhattan-like project” to crack encryption.

    Hasn’t Hillary also called for some sort of “internet gatekeeper”? Heh, if she gets her way you’ll probably have to have a government license just to use the internet.

    1. But you would be able to waive said fee by charitable donations to a list of charities (only 1 charity on the list, wanna guess?).

  10. In a post-Snowden world, many people want to know what the hell Yahoo’s leadership was thinking by complying with the sort of snooping that Apple gained public kudos by defying.

    I’m guessing the NSA had plenty of blackmail material on Yahoo’s leadership. That would certainly explain a lot. Or maybe they just reminded them what they did to Nacchio for defying them.

    1. Reading articles like that one make me realize that the government is truly just full of evil people. Not bumbling morons who can’t get a job elswhere causr they suck. No it’s full of horrible, power hungry, step-on-anyone-in-their-way, people. How do you stop that kind of evil?

      1. How do you stop that kind of evil?

        Something something… woodchippers… mumble mumble… lampposts and nooses…

  11. Clinton, in particular, may have had second thoughts about encryption after so much of her own correspondence spilled out across the internet.

    BWAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!1!!1!!!!!!! Good one, 2Chili!

    You can’t teach an old dog bitch new tricks.

  12. What a wacked thing to say. Government leaks are awesome.

  13. RE: In the Age of the Embarrassing Leak, Can We All Admit That Encryption Is a Good Thing?
    Government officials arguing against privacy protections are learning their importance in the most embarrassing ways possible.

    Encryption is only for our obvious betters enslaving us.
    Encryption is not for the little people.
    How many times does this have to said?

  14. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do,

    go to tech tab for work detail,,,,, http://www.careerstoday100.com

  15. They and other efforts start from the premise that it should at least be difficult for personal data. Government officials dont support that idea too.
    http://www.writinghelpservices.blogspot.com

  16. I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

    ===> http://www.NetNote70.com

  17. my Aunty Lillian recently got a nine month old Chevrolet Volt from only workin on a pc at home
    see more at———–>>> http://tinyurl.com/Usatoday01

  18. Our horrifyingly likely next president, Hillary Clinton, famously called for a “Manhattan-like project” to crack encryption.

    Hasn’t Hillary also called for some sort of “internet gatekeeper”? Heh, if she gets her way you’ll probably have to have a government license just to use the internet.?????
    ????? ???

  19. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  20. Peyton . even though Billy `s report is cool… on monday I got a gorgeous Maserati after I been earnin $8985 thiss month and even more than ten k lass month . it’s certainly the easiest work Ive ever had . I started this 9-months ago and practically straight away started bringin home at least $78 per-hr . look at this now

    ……………. http://www.jobhub44.com

  21. While coming to education, the technology has brought many advantages to students and as well as teachers. showbox For example, students can do their homework or assignment with ease and can complete it faster by using the Internet.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.