The impact of encryption on legitimate law enforcement and national security investigations is no small thing, and it won’t go away any time soon. No matter where you stand, there are consequences to the choices we, as a nation and people, make. It’s another “wicked” problem – not a simple one – and we need to be willing to think through our choices, in good faith, and rely on the best available facts and what we believe will best promote security and freedom and privacy. Be open-minded. If you think there are easy answers to the challenges of encryption in a free yet secure society, think twice.
Then use what you’ve learned to:
1. Identify in your initial post a point(s) or general assertion(s) by Orin Kerr that surprised you, challenged you or led you to agree or disagree with him, and explain why. In so doing use this article (and perhaps others’ articles) as a platform to address the legal, policy, and technical challenges posed by encryption. In your posts you may also consider what the rest of the world is doing in responding to the challenges of encryption.
Reading this article left me very conflicted. On one hand reading and understanding the companies respecting the privacy of the consumers protection is valid and understandable. On the other hand, specifically example 3, brings up how encryption can prevent other predators from being caught due to this. I believe there is a line as to when finding a workaround should be used. For simple crimes or charges, I believe it is typically not warranted. However, for items such as kidnappings, murder, and pedophilia a workaround is warranted.
I do not believe the government should necessarily find another option if there is no justification. A warrant may cover the right to search through one’s property, but if finding a workaround is essential, I believe another type of warrant should be obtained justifying exactly why. This is my opinion, but I believe this could help Apple or other companies come around to work together in that case. By showing a justifiable warrant as to why it is needed even if case details can not be explained I think this will help companies come around with the idea.
Overall, it should be evaluated if what is needed in one’s technology is essential and would be useful. I do not believe in undoing encryption just because it can be done. Evidence should be shown of why it is deemed essential to access this information.
Resources:
Kerr, O. S. (2016, October 14). The law of encryption workarounds. Reason.com. https://reason.com/volokh/2016/10/14/the-law-of-encryption-workarou/