At the beginning of the 15. Internet Governance Forum (IGF) of the United Nations (UN) promoted the Global Encryption Coalition (GEC) for an open worldwide discussion about planned and already adopted anti-encryption policies. It is important that not only technicians, but also ordinary citizens understand the dangers of unsafe communication in the network, emphasized GEC representatives.

About 75 organizations and in total to the 100 members counts in the summer under the auspices of the Internet Society Coalition founded by the Center for Democracy and Technology and other network organizations. “In the coming year and in the years to come,” said Gregory Nojeim from CDT in the virtual panel of the UN conference originally planned in Poland, to work together against the fallacy of back doors and front doors in secure communication channels, data storage devices and end-user devices.

Softening of the encryption After the United Kingdom and Australia, India and the USA are now also coming and the EU under the German Presidency to weaken encryption. The GEC members describe two paths that legislators are taking worldwide. On the one hand it is about the introduction of access for the authorities.

Even more draconian than the British “Investigatory Powers Act”, Australia’s “Telecommunications and Other Legislation Act” (TOLA) has been forcing everyone for almost a year Provider to provide individual loopholes for the police. The USA and the EU are also following this concept. The “Legal Access to Encrypted Communication” (LAED) is ready for the next US Congress. The EU governments want, under the impression of the latest terrorist attacks in Europe on 25. November adopt a draft legislation.

India’s government is taking a different path and is focusing on tightening the responsibility of the provider. Encryption becomes costly for providers when they have to turn their heads to the misdemeanors or crimes of their customers. Mishi Choudry, founder of the Indian Software Freedom Law Center, warned of the planned tightening of liability in view of the increasing use of services such as WhatsApp and WhatsApp Pay.

Of the consequences of insecure encryption for digital purchases and eBanking warned GEC member Michele Neylon of the Irish registrar Blacknight. The cryptographic protection of Internet routes and websites is the basis for protecting users from fraudsters in everyday digital life. “We currently live practically online. If we do that, we should be safe,” said the Irishman.

Encryption saves lives The GEC Committee to Protect Journalists (CJP) is not concerned with money or abstract values ​​in its commitment to secure encryption. Anyone who makes duplicate keys or circulates counterfeit keys, whether planned or accidentally, endangers the lives of journalists and their sources in extreme cases. According to Courtney Radsch, this is shown by examples from Syria in which journalists became victims of the Assad regime and the Islamic State because of unencrypted sources.

In addition, without secure encryption, society would have to forego disclosing money laundering, state corruption and arbitrariness – and bear the costs accordingly. Ensuring absolute confidentiality is already a challenge today. Mind you, the recent calls by the Five Eye states plus India and Japan for decryption capabilities have been to law enforcement. The secret services have been hoarding and using software vulnerabilities for many years, sometimes with fatal consequences.

Well-known arguments, new allies? There are no new arguments for the “extraordinary” access to encrypted data 2020, confirmed the GEC members at the IGF. The hint that vulnerabilities that have not been closed or that have been built in beforehand are damaging the security of all users, in view of the flood of new legislative initiatives, apparently bounces off the government. There is therefore agreement within the GEC that new allies are needed. Concerned parents, politicians and non-governmental organizations could be brought on board and conversations with the enemies “Spys and Spooks” would be sought. “In the end, it depends on how our society approaches this question,” said Choudry. (olb)