{"id":1349,"date":"2017-03-26T16:34:32","date_gmt":"2017-03-26T16:34:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/tomblog.firstsolo.net\/?p=1349"},"modified":"2017-03-26T18:10:27","modified_gmt":"2017-03-26T18:10:27","slug":"no-place-for-terrorists-to-hide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/tomblog.firstsolo.net\/index.php\/no-place-for-terrorists-to-hide\/","title":{"rendered":"“No place for terrorists to hide”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Home Secretary Amber Rudd is reported<\/a>\u00a0today to be in favour of giving intelligence services access to encrypted communications so there will be “no place for terrorists to hide”. This proposal demonstrates deep ignorance both about how modern encryption algorithms work and about how best to respond to terrorism. One would expect an MP to be better informed. That, at least, is the charitable interpretation of Ms Rudd’s comments. The uncharitable interpretation is rather dark and sinister.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Modern encryption: the cat is already out of the bag<\/span><\/p>\n

Since\u00a0Rivest, Shamir and Adleman first published their public key encryption algorithm in 1978, we have had access to encryption techniques which are mathematically proven to be impossible to break with current knowledge and technology and (it is strongly believed) even future knowledge and technology will not be able to break them (unless we crack quantum computing). Anyone with degree-level maths can implement these algorithms.<\/p>\n

So, the cat is out of the bag. Pandora’s box is open and cannot be shut again.\u00a0There is no way, now, of unknowing how to encrypt communications in this way.<\/p>\n

Of course, it might be argued that the government should persuade1<\/sup><\/a>And, let’s face it, governments can be very persuasive!<\/span><\/span>