SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Armed With Fear, Not Facts, Officials Go After Encryption in Wake of Paris
Echoing the post-9/11 era, intelligence officials and lawmakers are exploiting Friday's massacre to expand mass surveillance
Nov 19, 2015
Despite no available evidence that terror suspects used encryption to plan the Paris attacks, U.S. intelligence officials and lawmakers are seizing on the massacre to demand access to protected communications--in what critics warn is a blatant attempt to exploit fear in order to expand state surveillance.
Speaking at a cybersecurity conference in New York on Wednesday, FBI director James Comey argued that it is critical for government officials to have the power to read encrypted messages. Encryption has long been embraced by civil liberties advocates as a method for protecting internet and smartphone messages from spying and censorship--and ultimately safeguarding human rights.
"With lack of cooperation, we are left with 50-foot-high walls on either side," argued Comey. "We have to get to a place where we push information to each other at a pace that moves with the speed of the threat."
Comey is one voice in a crescendo that also includes U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). "Silicon Valley has to look at its products because if you create a product that allows evil monsters to communicate in this way, to behead children, to strike innocents--whether it's at a game in a stadium, in a small restaurant in Paris, take down an airliner--that's a big problem," the top Senate Intelligence Committee Democrat told MSNBC on Monday.
And on Monday, the embattled CIA director John Brennan criticized public "hand-wringing" over government surveillance, claiming that such concerns have made it more difficult for authorities to identify "murderous sociopaths" in ISIS. In making these statements, Brennan was directly referencing public outcry at revelations of mass government spying exposed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Now even New York Police Commissioner Bill Bratton--who was widely criticized for comparing Black Lives Matter protesters to "terrorists" earlier this year--is jumping into the fray, an indication that the push for greater access to encryption could also expand the power of controversial figures in policing.
"ISIS, taking advantage of the technology that the head of the FBI has been complaining about, I've been complaining about, going dark, the ability to go dark, I think you're going to see that playing a significant factor in this event," he told ABC's George Stephanopoulos on Sunday.
Bratton, however, appears to be wrong. As of Wednesday, reports indicated that those suspected of carrying out the Paris attacks used unencrypted communications.
Yet, as many have pointed out, numerous major media outlets are providing uncritical platform for such voices, parroting headlines such as this New York Times one which ran Monday: "Encrypted Messaging Apps Face New Scrutiny Over Possible Role in Paris Attacks."
In a tweet published on Thursday, Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald suggested that readers do a test: "when you see a print or TV story on Paris and encryption, look to see if CIA official claims are uncritically shown without dissent."
The calls for greater state spying power extend far beyond access to encrypted messages. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), introduced a bill on Tuesday to extend mass surveillance under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, in what the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Cindy Cohn called "exploitation of this latest international tragedy" that is "sadly similar" to that seen in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Meanwhile, some media outlets are featuring voices openly calling for the total suspension of privacy rights and civil liberties while advocating that Muslim-Americans should be aggressively monitored and surveyed. As Fox News contributor Bo Dietl declared on Monday: "Let's stop worrying about people's rights."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
Despite no available evidence that terror suspects used encryption to plan the Paris attacks, U.S. intelligence officials and lawmakers are seizing on the massacre to demand access to protected communications--in what critics warn is a blatant attempt to exploit fear in order to expand state surveillance.
Speaking at a cybersecurity conference in New York on Wednesday, FBI director James Comey argued that it is critical for government officials to have the power to read encrypted messages. Encryption has long been embraced by civil liberties advocates as a method for protecting internet and smartphone messages from spying and censorship--and ultimately safeguarding human rights.
"With lack of cooperation, we are left with 50-foot-high walls on either side," argued Comey. "We have to get to a place where we push information to each other at a pace that moves with the speed of the threat."
Comey is one voice in a crescendo that also includes U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). "Silicon Valley has to look at its products because if you create a product that allows evil monsters to communicate in this way, to behead children, to strike innocents--whether it's at a game in a stadium, in a small restaurant in Paris, take down an airliner--that's a big problem," the top Senate Intelligence Committee Democrat told MSNBC on Monday.
And on Monday, the embattled CIA director John Brennan criticized public "hand-wringing" over government surveillance, claiming that such concerns have made it more difficult for authorities to identify "murderous sociopaths" in ISIS. In making these statements, Brennan was directly referencing public outcry at revelations of mass government spying exposed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Now even New York Police Commissioner Bill Bratton--who was widely criticized for comparing Black Lives Matter protesters to "terrorists" earlier this year--is jumping into the fray, an indication that the push for greater access to encryption could also expand the power of controversial figures in policing.
"ISIS, taking advantage of the technology that the head of the FBI has been complaining about, I've been complaining about, going dark, the ability to go dark, I think you're going to see that playing a significant factor in this event," he told ABC's George Stephanopoulos on Sunday.
Bratton, however, appears to be wrong. As of Wednesday, reports indicated that those suspected of carrying out the Paris attacks used unencrypted communications.
Yet, as many have pointed out, numerous major media outlets are providing uncritical platform for such voices, parroting headlines such as this New York Times one which ran Monday: "Encrypted Messaging Apps Face New Scrutiny Over Possible Role in Paris Attacks."
In a tweet published on Thursday, Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald suggested that readers do a test: "when you see a print or TV story on Paris and encryption, look to see if CIA official claims are uncritically shown without dissent."
The calls for greater state spying power extend far beyond access to encrypted messages. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), introduced a bill on Tuesday to extend mass surveillance under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, in what the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Cindy Cohn called "exploitation of this latest international tragedy" that is "sadly similar" to that seen in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Meanwhile, some media outlets are featuring voices openly calling for the total suspension of privacy rights and civil liberties while advocating that Muslim-Americans should be aggressively monitored and surveyed. As Fox News contributor Bo Dietl declared on Monday: "Let's stop worrying about people's rights."
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
Despite no available evidence that terror suspects used encryption to plan the Paris attacks, U.S. intelligence officials and lawmakers are seizing on the massacre to demand access to protected communications--in what critics warn is a blatant attempt to exploit fear in order to expand state surveillance.
Speaking at a cybersecurity conference in New York on Wednesday, FBI director James Comey argued that it is critical for government officials to have the power to read encrypted messages. Encryption has long been embraced by civil liberties advocates as a method for protecting internet and smartphone messages from spying and censorship--and ultimately safeguarding human rights.
"With lack of cooperation, we are left with 50-foot-high walls on either side," argued Comey. "We have to get to a place where we push information to each other at a pace that moves with the speed of the threat."
Comey is one voice in a crescendo that also includes U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). "Silicon Valley has to look at its products because if you create a product that allows evil monsters to communicate in this way, to behead children, to strike innocents--whether it's at a game in a stadium, in a small restaurant in Paris, take down an airliner--that's a big problem," the top Senate Intelligence Committee Democrat told MSNBC on Monday.
And on Monday, the embattled CIA director John Brennan criticized public "hand-wringing" over government surveillance, claiming that such concerns have made it more difficult for authorities to identify "murderous sociopaths" in ISIS. In making these statements, Brennan was directly referencing public outcry at revelations of mass government spying exposed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Now even New York Police Commissioner Bill Bratton--who was widely criticized for comparing Black Lives Matter protesters to "terrorists" earlier this year--is jumping into the fray, an indication that the push for greater access to encryption could also expand the power of controversial figures in policing.
"ISIS, taking advantage of the technology that the head of the FBI has been complaining about, I've been complaining about, going dark, the ability to go dark, I think you're going to see that playing a significant factor in this event," he told ABC's George Stephanopoulos on Sunday.
Bratton, however, appears to be wrong. As of Wednesday, reports indicated that those suspected of carrying out the Paris attacks used unencrypted communications.
Yet, as many have pointed out, numerous major media outlets are providing uncritical platform for such voices, parroting headlines such as this New York Times one which ran Monday: "Encrypted Messaging Apps Face New Scrutiny Over Possible Role in Paris Attacks."
In a tweet published on Thursday, Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald suggested that readers do a test: "when you see a print or TV story on Paris and encryption, look to see if CIA official claims are uncritically shown without dissent."
The calls for greater state spying power extend far beyond access to encrypted messages. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), introduced a bill on Tuesday to extend mass surveillance under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, in what the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Cindy Cohn called "exploitation of this latest international tragedy" that is "sadly similar" to that seen in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Meanwhile, some media outlets are featuring voices openly calling for the total suspension of privacy rights and civil liberties while advocating that Muslim-Americans should be aggressively monitored and surveyed. As Fox News contributor Bo Dietl declared on Monday: "Let's stop worrying about people's rights."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.