We've been shown time and again that strong encryption puts crims behind bars, so why do politicos hate it?

If we trust it, crooks will too – meaning Plod can get their kiloscrote nab


Column Back in October, a call by spy agencies to weaken end-to-end encryption "because of the children" provoked a bit of analysis on how many times UK Home Secretaries had banged the same drum. All of them, it turned out. All of the time.

The argument is a bit beyond Priti Patel, alas, as she ran the threadbare rag up the flagpole yet again in April, presumably on the grounds that the 50th time's the charm.

The real world has not done her argument any favours in the weeks since. Last Wednesday, law-abiding citizens around the world enjoyed hearing about a massive collar-feeling spree courtesy of Operation Trojan Shield. This was a sting that did better than many a startup: it flogged a respectable 12,000 custom messaging devices to the, if you will, crimmunity before using the intercepted data to reel in getting on for a thousand of its least attractive members.

Not enough? You'll have to go back to, oh, the day before, when the great Colonial Crypto Cashback scheme was revealed. Here, the ransomware'd fuel pipeline saw $2m returned from the maw of the malware mob after the Feds not only intercepted the blaggers' Bitcoin wallet but also the keys. You know, the stuff built from unbreakable, completely secure encryptonium.

Finally, because we must Think Of The Children, we can skip back into the distant days of last month, when the German police closed down the world's biggest paedophile picture palace, despite it being on what the world calls the Big Scary Darknet and what we know as the internet but with extra relays. That has rather a lot of encryption. Yet again, though, the ringleaders got their doors dismantled by size 13s at dawn while the punters nervously await their own disk scan delights.

All these things – and so, so many more – have happened in spite of not having the ability to break strong encryption. It's not as if these were heroic, decade-long one-off events either. They've delivered exactly the sort of results that we're told are impossible, and delivered them spectacularly. These are arrests at scale: welcome to the world of the kiloscrote bust.

We're familiar with the marketing message that the internet scales, that with the right techniques and planning, you can have a good idea in the morning and half a billion users by teatime. The idea that this applies to policing as well is harder to take onboard, but the same drivers apply and the same benefits accrue – to the police, admittedly, rather than their customers.

The reason so many cloud services are possible and profitable is that they easily match the technology to the market. Most of the hard work's been done for you: your customers are familiar and at ease with internet technologies. They trust them. They may not trust you, but that's your job. If you deliver a good service, you'll get a useful group of regulars who'll reward you, perhaps with money but more often with data.

Guess what. Criminals are people too. What they do generates data, exactly as your Aunty Heather does as she goes online shopping, only with more guns, drugs, and fraud. Or maybe not, depending on your family. Persuade criminals to use a particular service, and you can literally sit on your blue-trousered behind drinking institutional coffee and watch them send you all their secrets. Because it's the internet, you can do all this with a very small team running the system – minimising the chances that mobster counter-intelligence will bribe their way into, steal, or spot what's going on.

Like all e-commerce, this depends on trust. As with all of us upstanding incorruptibles, the underworld does its research. It reads technical reportage, and it knows, as we know, that the basic mechanisms of standard encryption are mathematically secure – for now and never without caveats, but good enough. So they happily assemble themselves in large groups of self-incriminating naughty people while Plod does the paperwork to swoop in and enjoy that 800-arrests-for-the-price-of-one online offer.

If they didn't trust the internet's encryption because of laws ensuring its insecurity, they wouldn't do this. They wouldn't stop being criminals, but they'd move on to doing something safer and more profitable – most likely finding ways to jemmy open the state-mandated back doors and make off with all our transactions. Not so much win-win but the other thing, oh, what is it… ah yes, lose-lose.

The evidence piles up day after day, week after week, world-weary Reg column after world-weary Reg column.

State-mandated insecure encryption is a very bad idea. You can't make anything more secure by making it less secure.

Good old-fashioned policing backed up by well-funded technical expertise and lots of human intelligence works just fine, and it bolsters, rather than threatens, the rights and protection of citizens. Yes, even the children. Think about that, Priti. ®

Similar topics

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • Experts: AI should be recognized as inventors in patent law
    Plus: Police release deepfake of murdered teen in cold case, and more

    In-brief Governments around the world should pass intellectual property laws that grant rights to AI systems, two academics at the University of New South Wales in Australia argued.

    Alexandra George, and Toby Walsh, professors of law and AI, respectively, believe failing to recognize machines as inventors could have long-lasting impacts on economies and societies. 

    "If courts and governments decide that AI-made inventions cannot be patented, the implications could be huge," they wrote in a comment article published in Nature. "Funders and businesses would be less incentivized to pursue useful research using AI inventors when a return on their investment could be limited. Society could miss out on the development of worthwhile and life-saving inventions."

    Continue reading
  • Declassified and released: More secret files on US govt's emergency doomsday powers
    Nuke incoming? Quick break out the plans for rationing, censorship, property seizures, and more

    More papers describing the orders and messages the US President can issue in the event of apocalyptic crises, such as a devastating nuclear attack, have been declassified and released for all to see.

    These government files are part of a larger collection of records that discuss the nature, reach, and use of secret Presidential Emergency Action Documents: these are executive orders, announcements, and statements to Congress that are all ready to sign and send out as soon as a doomsday scenario occurs. PEADs are supposed to give America's commander-in-chief immediate extraordinary powers to overcome extraordinary events.

    PEADs have never been declassified or revealed before. They remain hush-hush, and their exact details are not publicly known.

    Continue reading
  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022