Share this
The Rise of Cybersecurity as a Political Hammer
by Reflare Research Team on Aug 9, 2022 6:58:00 PM
To this day, governments have many reasons to try limiting the use of strong cryptography. However, when did this trend move into the mainstream consciousness and become an issue directly engaging wider society? Prior to the 2016 U.S. election cycle, a controversial bill was tabled with the aim of reducing the use of smartphones with unbreakable cryptography... and the cybersecurity world collectively scratched its chin.
First Published 27th January 2016 | Latest Refresh 9th August 2022
Stop!... Hammer Time.
4 min read | Reflare Research Team
The Political Justification
Think back to a simpler time.
The 2016 US election cycle brought numerous new proposals to the table. What made this cycle different from previous elections was that security and technology were now being used as voter weapons. Security and cryptography were especially in the limelight, especially given the role cryptography played in the Paris terror attacks only a few months earlier.
One particular bill was (AB 1681), introduced into the Californian Legislature by Jim Cooper who wanted to limit the use of smartphones with unbreakable cryptography. Instead of using terrorism as a reason for the law, the bill pointed to human trafficking as the main concern.
Implications of the Logic
The bill proposes to abolish the use of cryptography that cannot be decrypted by the smartphone’s manufacturer or operating system provider. Currently, manufacturers such as Apple and Google do not have the ability to decrypt any encrypted messages stored on a device.
At the time, the tabling of this bill set a new trend in using technology for gain in the political arena. Today, with security concerns continuing to rise across most segments of society, technology being used as a tool to gain a political foothold on voter interests is now commonplace. Security has slowly become an ethical topic used to sway votes between political parties.
For instance, take the Hillary Clinton email incident of the same era. This became priority news at the time as each party used technology as a way to create doubt and suspicion in the minds of voters, and there have been many other domestic and international instances since.
So many emails, so few servers.
Remember - The Precedent Now Exists
Although security is a concept that most people do not understand to a level of sufficiency, the vast majority of people (including politicians) do have strong views on the subject. Although Bill AB 1681 was not expected to (and did not) pass, it did succeed in becoming a very convenient stepping-stone for future proposals. Politicians can now point to this bill’s very existence to sway voters that not the strengthening, but the weakening of cybersecurity is a valid approach for combating terrorism, human trafficking, organised crime, and other illegal activities that play to the fears of the electorate.
However, cryptography is now commonplace in most communications, whether it is used by fake LV handbag sellers, drug dealers, tax evaders, or various other immoral and illegal activities. Of course, encrypted communications are also used for all kinds of moral and legal purposes, but the trick here is how it is viewed; the application is independent of the technology. Cryptography isn’t the problem; it’s the use case.
What made this bill interesting in the context of a global market is that the US has been a trendsetter in law-making. If such a bill that outlawed unbreakable smartphone cryptography were to pass in the future, it is very likely that other countries will follow in their footsteps (particularly in the face of rising geopolitical tensions). This would propose a monumental set of challenges for cybersecurity professionals whose aim is to keep law-abiding systems, data and people as safe and secure as possible.
Cryptography can be a scary concept for voters who do not understand its benefits. Politicians often use topics such as technology to sway voters using scare tactics and promising to catch the bad guys. However, disallowing encrypted data on smartphone devices would put a huge dent in privacy protection.
As you have seen in this research brief, there is much to think through when it comes to protecting data. However, encryption is only one aspect of resilient cybersecurity. To stay up to date with the latest information on the latest data protection risks, subscribe to our periodic newsletters, and review our research briefs on the following related topic topic below.
Share this
- September 2024 (1)
- August 2024 (1)
- July 2024 (1)
- June 2024 (1)
- April 2024 (2)
- February 2024 (1)
- January 2024 (1)
- December 2023 (1)
- November 2023 (1)
- October 2023 (1)
- September 2023 (1)
- August 2023 (1)
- July 2023 (1)
- June 2023 (2)
- May 2023 (2)
- April 2023 (3)
- March 2023 (4)
- February 2023 (3)
- January 2023 (5)
- December 2022 (1)
- November 2022 (2)
- October 2022 (1)
- September 2022 (11)
- August 2022 (5)
- July 2022 (1)
- May 2022 (3)
- April 2022 (1)
- February 2022 (4)
- January 2022 (3)
- December 2021 (2)
- November 2021 (3)
- October 2021 (2)
- September 2021 (1)
- August 2021 (1)
- June 2021 (1)
- May 2021 (14)
- February 2021 (1)
- October 2020 (1)
- September 2020 (1)
- July 2020 (1)
- June 2020 (1)
- May 2020 (1)
- April 2020 (2)
- March 2020 (1)
- February 2020 (1)
- January 2020 (3)
- December 2019 (1)
- November 2019 (2)
- October 2019 (3)
- September 2019 (5)
- August 2019 (2)
- July 2019 (3)
- June 2019 (3)
- May 2019 (2)
- April 2019 (3)
- March 2019 (2)
- February 2019 (3)
- January 2019 (1)
- December 2018 (3)
- November 2018 (5)
- October 2018 (4)
- September 2018 (3)
- August 2018 (3)
- July 2018 (4)
- June 2018 (4)
- May 2018 (2)
- April 2018 (4)
- March 2018 (5)
- February 2018 (3)
- January 2018 (3)
- December 2017 (2)
- November 2017 (4)
- October 2017 (3)
- September 2017 (5)
- August 2017 (3)
- July 2017 (3)
- June 2017 (4)
- May 2017 (4)
- April 2017 (2)
- March 2017 (4)
- February 2017 (2)
- January 2017 (1)
- December 2016 (1)
- November 2016 (4)
- October 2016 (2)
- September 2016 (4)
- August 2016 (5)
- July 2016 (3)
- June 2016 (5)
- May 2016 (3)
- April 2016 (4)
- March 2016 (5)
- February 2016 (4)