$I am a pro-encryption

Thu, Mar 17, 2016

Firstly, happy to see you again.

For past few months, this blog have been frozen as I was as busy as have little time to doing stuff for myself. As you might have already noticed, from now, this blog will be written in English. This adjustment was due to the variety of font I can choose once I wrote in English.

In this article, I will talk about the recent debate on encryption and how it related to you.

Encryption is no more than the transform of data so that it become a form which only selective end will able to understand. There is nothing magic, beyond the surface, encryption itself is no more than the sequence of basic math operations.

Long before the modern cryptography emerged, prevent other from reading or inspect communion is a common practice. From masking the actual content inside envelope, to sealing with wax, these kind of practice is widely accepted.

However, this kind of protection is not as strong as modern cryptography that not only assure trusted messenger cannot silently get a copy of content but also untrusted messenger can be used to transmitting data without risking leaking the data.

And currently, the messenger we mentioned above can be a network like internet, or a device like a disk or a phone, while our chosen receiver of message can be your friend or yourself at a later time.

The widely discussed question is that, whether there should be a backdoor for government to read so-called encrypted data.

From technological view, this should be considered with threat model. Is encryption used to protect us from governmental inspection after they have physically controlled our device.

Fighting against terrorism is important, but prevent government from becoming an authoritarian government is more important than that.

Although most of them who support encryption claim that it is just about prevent ‘bad guy’ for getting the content from your phone, like thief, but we ALL know ‘bad guy’ can be government. People don’t talk about that because they are not willing to publicly argue about that government can be a threat. But obviously that they can be, and in most of area they have already be.

I live in China, the problem here is not government is so weak, but it is TOO strong. And this can be applied to many country as well.

On another hand, the terrorists attack other not only because they think others is living differently, but also for the reason that they are living better in a way that they have no hope to pursue.

So that they are devoted to downgrade others’ living styles, by force others living in fear, and they might have realised the best approach for doing that is not driving a aircraft into a building, but give a reason to government so that they can increase their power and eventually make their country a place everyone have to live in fear.

Encryption can ensure that the government don’t possess more information than us. And nowadays, the correct and accurate information is as powerful as weapon. This will enable us to balance the power with government, so that the government won’t become an authoritarian one, and we don’t have to live in fear.

Banning effective encryption is said to help fighting against terrorism, but if we allow them to do so, we have resigned in the war against terrorism.

And luckily, you’ve got a choice(or actually you don’t).