We often witness regulatory movements by different governments concerning encryption. It's clear that this technology plays a crucial role in our contemporary world. Let's delve into this topic in depth, analyze its relevance, and the possible implications of governmental decisions.
What is encryption?
Before we start, let's quickly review what encryption is. Encryption is the mathematical modification of a message (remember, after all, they are zeros and ones) so that only those who know how it has been modified can revert it to an initial state and read it.
There are many types of encryption, but the most secure is end-to-end encryption. It's the most secure because only the sender and the recipient know how the message has been modified (encrypted). Only they have the key. This is the type of encryption used by protocols like iMessage, FaceTime, and more.
Why is encryption so important?
The answer is simple: it guarantees the security of our information. As Tim Cook has mentioned on several occasions, our phones store more personal data than our homes. From photos and health records to messages and contacts, encryption stands as the protective shield for our data.
Who wants to weaken encryption?
Governments and security agencies of various countries are accustomed to being able to access almost any information they desired: intercepting mail, tapping phone lines, entering homes, etc. With the advent of new technologies, these techniques have undergone a radical shift, and they can no longer access everything. No one can access an encrypted conversation, no one.
Why weaken encryption?
There's a narrative that proposes sacrificing privacy for the sake of security. But, would weakening encryption actually serve this purpose? The answer is a resounding no. Malicious actors will always find alternative ways to transmit information securely, while weakening encryption would compromise the security of the vast majority of users, a decision that is disproportionate and lacks logic.
A law that prohibited or imposed restrictions on encryption would be a very negative precedent for any country. And as Apple itself said in the case against the FBI, "you can't create a key only for the good guys"; if something is opened, it becomes open to everyone sooner or later.
If we aspire for technology to continue permeating all aspects of our life, it must do so securely. After all, the technological infrastructure necessary to ensure that a note on our iPhone is as secure as a message on paper is truly complex.
On Hanaringo | Apple updates iMessage encryption to make it quantum-computer resistant: here's what it means