7KLVIDWXLW\LVQ¶WXQLTXHO\$PHULFDQ ,W¶VDQLQWHUQDWLRQDOD̆DLU7KH
Australian government has already passed a law that requires
companies to provide law enforcement access to encrypted messages.
The UK has debated a similar bill.
LOTS OF IDEAS, ALL OF THEM BAD
:KDWWKHQLPURGVLQṘFHZDQWYDULHV6RPHZRXOGUHTXLUHFRPSDQLHV
to keep data and encryption keys accessible so with a legal warrant, law
HQIRUFHPHQWFRXOGWDNHDSHHN6RPHZRXOGUHTXLUHIXQGDPHQWDO
changes to encrypted systems where a central agency issued keys to
technology companies, allowing law enforcement to decrypt any data.
William Barr, aforementioned clod, does not seem to have outlined a
preference in how messages and data should be made available. That’s
¿QHEHFDXVHDOOLGHDVIRUEXLOGLQJDQ\NLQGRIEDFNGRRUDUHEDGDQGIRU
the same reasons.
For one thing, this concept assumes that law enforcement will always act
in the best interest of society. Administrations and laws will change,
however, and what is protected today may be fair game tomorrow. For
another, the fools assume that warrants are adequate to limit access to
the personal information of innocent individuals—something we know
WREHXQWUXHIURPWKHZD\WKH16$KDQGOHGLWVPDVVLYHVS\LQJ
RSHUDWLRQVLQWKHSDVW7KURXJKERWKQHJOLJHQFHDQGGHVLJQWKH16$
accessed much more information than it was supposed to, including that
RIWKH86FLWL]HQVWKHDJHQF\LVSURKLELWHGIURPVS\LQJRQ
More important, proponents of backdoors believe that they will be the
RQO\RQHVDEOHWRXVHWKHEDFNGRRUV7KLVLVDOVRZURQJ(YHQLI86ODZ
enforcement carries out backdoor operations in the saintliest of
manners, another country might not be so careful. Barr and others often
LQYRNHWKHPRVWKRUUL¿FRIFULPHV²KXPDQWUḊFNLQJFKLOGVH[XDO
exploitation, terrorism—as necessitating the creation of encryption
backdoors. But there’s nothing to stop another country from demanding
a backdoor and using it to repress dissent, commit genocide, or carry out
attacks on its own.
M
a
x
E
d
d
y
