Interview: Encryption expert Riana Pfefferkorn on the erosion of online free speech
Written by
Osman
Take the first step to protect yourself online. Try ExpressVPN risk-free.
Get ExpressVPN
Comments
As a technologjst, with over thirty years experience in computers and security, I agree with some of the sentiment in this article. However, I think that the lead-off discussion regarding president Trump is merely a lightly veiled, and unjustified political attack, consistent with the so-called Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). Instead of presenting more substance, and unbiased recommendations, the author or the editor has chosen to use it as vectored attack. The author's, or again the editor's, political persuasions should not be given such prominence in a supposedly technical forum.
Howard A Higgins is right on the mark.
I really smell something bad lying in the road ahead with all the relatively sudden urgency for legislation like this 'earn-it' bill to 'authorize' back door access for law enforcement usage? They've already been doing it for years just because they can. When they run into some advanced form of encryption they bring in their friendly Israeli hackmasters to bust the lock and find everything they need to know. An agent once told me that a search warrant only really has to describe the place or what is to be searched, and what they are looking for? In matters of relative national security in active pursuit of bad actors intent on performing bad acts on U.S. soil, these standards are even less restricted in general context for pragmatic purposes. The warrant doesn't really specify the physical methodology for the search. For instance with drugs, the police can choose to use body cavity searches, drug sniffing dogs, or wall penetrating radar? Whose going to complain about 'illegal' methods of searching when the results of the search were instrumental in preventing a terrorist act? Naturally, these tactics eventually become a breeding ground for abuse. A few years ago when drones were starting to become tools of police, There was a county Sheriff in N or SD I believe, who made a public statement over concerns of privacy rights being violated by random warrantless fly over searches in his venue, and his reply to the press was something like, That's how I would get the probable cause to do a raid and search, by using the drone to see something suspicious on someone's back porch. (of course the FBI has been doing exactly that type of warrantless aerial surveillance with 'special' cameras for years with their own dedicated fleet of small aircraft, and of course now small drones. (We still don't know 'who' was behind that mysterious huge swarm of drones over Nebraska not too long ago that was documented on video and witnessed by officials) I think the 'authorities' are really worried about beefed up Privacy laws-when enough people start to become angry enough about it- emerging that simply shut off their reckless unwarranted privacy violation of the 1st/A AND 4th/A with random or algorithm focused surveillance on people's private internet communications and business. So they want to preclude that eventuality before the public wakes up and does something about it by exempting themselves from punishment for violating the Constitution any time they feel like it. Because 'They' know they can never help themselves from abusing their authority. It's the nature of the beast. They have absolute power, and as we know from history, absolute power ALWAYS absolutely corrupts. Especially with nobody or nothing to regulate them. except themselves. By the way, What they are doing is a crime. 18 USCC 240-241 . They cannot deprive you of your right to privacy or any Constitutional right,even under color of law... But this is the most 'un-prosecuted' crime out there. Great Article Ms. Riana. You are a true Champion of Liberty!
I wholly agree with Howard ^^. This article is noticeably politically motivated. While we all can advocate for internet privacy, free speech, and end-end encryption, this article fails to provide a clear and technical viewpoint of the subject matter. For an article supposedly focused on threats to free speech on the internet, the author fails to mention the assault on free speech perpetrated by big tech (primarily against conservative voices). Google has outright expressed its skepticism towards free speech by claiming it has become a "social, economic, and political weapon." This is just as important to the future of civil liberty in America. as back doors and government surveillance.