Of the many “anti-terrorist” proposals now being considered on Capitol Hill, New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg has been pushing one of the more controversial. Gregg says expanding government power to monitor cyberspace communication could prove essential in protecting against future acts of terrorism. As NHPR’s Josh Rogers reports, privacy advocates say otherwise.
CRYPTO 9/20/01 ROGERS
Of the many “anti-terrorist” proposals now being considered on Capitol Hill, New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg has been pushing one of the more controversial. Gregg says expanding government power to monitor cyberspace communication could prove essential in protecting against future acts of terrorism. As NHPR’s Josh Rogers reports, privacy advocates say otherwise.
"We actually are going to have to shift gears so that were looking at law enforcement taking action before the event occurs, which is a change in our culture and something we’ve got to handle because we can’t allow these terrorists to commit these acts which kill thousands of people and then bring them to justice."
Foremost among Republican Senator Judd Gregg’s plan is to provide law enforcement with the means to decode encrypted communication carried out via telephone, or on the Internet. Gregg says technology has allowed terrorists too much of an advantage over existing police powers.
"Encryption capabilities have far exceeded our capacities to break codes. Today even the smallest cell of terrorist can afford to buy an encrypting capability that can be physically broken."
Gregg says present circumstances demand software manufacturers aid enforcement efforts by providing the government the ability to decipher cloaked messages. Gregg says he’s sensitive to the fourth amendment’s protections against unreasonable search and seizure. But he remains confident lawmakers could create a process to ensure rights are not violated.
"We set up a quasi-judicial group, probably appointed by the Supreme Court, who would be the holders of the keys. And if you made encryption activity you would deposit the keys with that group. And then if law enforcement needed access to those keys, they would go through a judicial proceeding in order to get those keys."
David Sobel, General Counsel for the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, says such a plan would be a big mistake. He says it would in one fell swoop reverse standards carefully crafted over the last decade by lawmakers, the computer industry, and the Clinton administration. Sobel also adds that thus far there’s simply no evidence to buttress Gregg’s assumption that encryption had anything to do with last week’s attacks.
"We need to look at what happened last week, identify whatever failures there were, whatever legal limitations might have created problems and address those. But I think what we’re seeing are some very broad proposals that have very little relation to what happened last week."
Instead, Sobel says, Gregg’s proposal to require software companies build so-called “backdoors” into their encryption programs would end up hurting the very same citizens it seeks to protect.
"Is Osama Bin Laden going to use encryption approved by the US Government? So yes, you can pass a law, but it doesn’t man you’re going to accomplish anything other than restricting the security options of law abiding American citizens."
Makers of encryption technologies agree. Phillip Zimmerman designed perhaps world’s most widely used personal encryption program, Pretty Good Privacy. He says creating a “secure backdoor” is easier said than done. Zimmerman also warns that compromising encryption could imperil the electronic security industries like banking and healthcare rely on. This much Zimmerman says, he knows from experience.
"We actually did have a method for companies to get into encrypted files. It was a voluntary system, but it added a lot of complexity to the product and it turned out there were a lot of bugs in that that could be possible exploited by an attacker. So, I don’t think it’s a good idea. I think it will weaken security. I think it will fail in its mission. It will not be effective."
But Zimmerman, for one, doesn’t expect Gregg to be persuaded. He says Gregg is a familiar antagonist to those concerned with cyberspace privacy. Zimmerman also stresses that cyberspace is truly without borders, a reality he says lawmakers interested in promoting global democracy ignore at their own peril.
"China, or Iraq, or Serbia, those governments are going to say why should you have back doors to your products be we shouldn’t have them for ours? I’m saying other governments will use these products to oppress their own people."
Be that as it may, Senator Gregg’s staffers say Gregg hopes to have his proposal before lawmakers as soon as possible. They also say he’s been meeting with Attorney General John Ashcroft to discuss anti-terror measures. They declined comment, however, on whether or not Gregg’s plan has the blessing of the Bush administration.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo