Tensions between Facebook and various governments across the world have come to the forefront once again, and again it’s related to the on-going saga surrounding encryption. We explain what’s going on.
One of the biggest bones of contention between tech companies and governments or law enforcement is the ability of tech companies to offer users complete privacy. Tech companies frequently strive to provide their customers with total and absolute privacy on their devices or online communications. Governments and law enforcement, on the other hand, want the ability to lawfully access devices or online communications of their citizens, to aid with criminal investigations. But total privacy & total security by definition – tech companies argue – does not allow for such access.
Tech companies, including Apple and now Facebook, are reluctant to include a process that would allow law enforcement access to devices or communications because they claim it would be tantamount to a “back door”, which undermines the security and privacy of their products and could always theoretically be exploited by cyber-crooks. Basically, total privacy cannot exist in a product if that product also includes a feature that allows access to the developer (and by extension, law enforcement.)
Sponsored Content. Continued below...
This stand-off between tech and state has taken on many different forms. Most notably in 2016 when the FBI wanted access to the phone belonging to the terrorist in the San Bernardino shooting, and attempted to force manufacturer Apple into “cracking” their own device. Apple refused.
The stand-off also extends to a technology called end-to-end encryption. This is a method of encrypting online communications between two parties, and is considered the most secure method of communicating through the Internet.
Nearly every single messaging service online encrypts messages sent from one user to another, to prevent them from being snooped on by a “man in the middle” attack. There are two distinct ways the developer of a messaging service can encrypt communications between two people online. They can encrypt messages between two people and store the decryption key on their own servers. Through this method, law enforcement could subpoena that decryption key and potentially force a messaging service to allow them to see the conversations of specific users. Naturally this method is seen as less private, since a method exists for someone other than the sender and recipient to see messages in conversation.
The second method is end-to-end encryption. The decryption key in this case isn’t stored on the servers of the messaging service, rather on the devices of the people in the conversation. It’s a more secure method of communicating online, with no realistic method of “breaking in” to the conversation. This includes by law enforcement. It has the added “bonus” that the developer of the messaging service cannot be forced to allow law enforcement to access a conversation between users, because the messaging service literally don’t have a decryption key.
Sponsored Content. Continued below...
Services like WhatsApp and Telegram have been using end-to-end encryption for years.
Facebook Messenger hasn’t, but Mark Zuckerberg recently announced that all Facebook owned products, including Messenger, will adopt end-to-end encryption.
This hasn’t pleased governments, especially in the US, UK and Australia, who have publicly urged Zuckerberg not to do so.
Their argument is that criminals, sex traffickers, terrorists and child abusers will be given a method of communicating without worry of being spied on, and without worry that their conversations will be discovered by authorities.
Facebook responded by claiming they have other methods to track such illicit material without needing to provide law enforcement access to private messages.
And that’s the current stand-off between tech and state. In this case it’s Facebook facing off against the US government. But in the broader scheme that also includes the likes of Apple, Google and Microsoft, it’s a stand-off that will be generating many more posts like this one as tech companies, governments and law enforcement seek to find solutions to this persistent predicament.