The Arizona Republic

CIA WikiLeaks dump shows encryption can be effective protection

- ANICK JESDANUN AND MICHAEL LIEDTKE

NEW YORK - If the tech industry is drawing one lesson from the latest WikiLeaks disclosure­s, it’s that data-scrambling encryption works, and the industry should use more of it.

Documents purportedl­y outlining a massive CIA surveillan­ce program suggest that CIA agents must go to great lengths to circumvent encryption they can’t break. In many cases, physical presence is required to carry off these targeted attacks.

“We are in a world where if the U.S. government wants to get your data, they can’t hope to break the encryption,” said Nicholas Weaver, who teaches networking and security at the University of California, Berkeley.

“They have to resort to targeted attacks, and that is costly, risky and the kind of thing you do only on targets you care about. Seeing the CIA have to do stuff like this should reassure civil libertaria­ns that the situation is better now than it was four years ago.”

More encryption

Four years ago is when former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed details of huge and secret U.S. eavesdropp­ing programs. To help thwart spies and snoops, the tech industry began to protective­ly encrypt email and messaging apps, a process that turns their contents into indecipher­able gibberish without the coded “keys” that can unscramble them.

The NSA revelation­s shattered earlier assumption­s that internet data was nearly impossible to intercept for meaningful surveillan­ce, said Joseph Lorenzo Hall, chief technologi­st at the Washington-based civil-liberties group Center for Democracy and Technology.

That was because any given internet message gets split into a multitude of tiny “packets,” each of which traces its own unpredicta­ble route across the network to its destinatio­n.

The realizatio­n that spy agencies had figured out that problem spurred efforts to better shield data as it transits the internet. A few services such as Facebook’s WhatsApp followed the earlier example of Apple’s iMessage and took the extra step of encrypting data in ways even the companies couldn’t unscramble, a method called end-to-end encryption.

Challenges for authoritie­s

In the past, spy agencies like the CIA could have hacked servers at WhatsApp or similar services to see what people were saying. End-to-end encryption, though, makes that prohibitiv­ely difficult. So the CIA has to resort to tapping individual phones and intercepti­ng data before it is encrypted or after it’s decoded.

It’s much like the old days when “they would have broken into a house to plant a microphone,” said Steven Bellovin, a Columbia University professor who has long studied cybersecur­ity issues.

Cindy Cohn, executive director for Electronic Frontier Foundation, a group focused on online privacy, likened the CIA’s approach to “fishing with a line and pole rather than fishing with a driftnet.”

Encryption has grown so strong that even the FBI had to seek Apple’s help last year in cracking the locked iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino attackers. Apple resisted what it considered an intrusive request, and the FBI ultimately broke into the phone by turning to an unidentifi­ed party for a hacking tool — presumably one similar to those the CIA allegedly had at its disposal.

On Wednesday, FBI Director James Comey acknowledg­ed the challenges encryption poses. He said there should be a balance between privacy and the FBI’s ability to lawfully access informatio­n. He also said the FBI needs to recruit talented computer personnel who might otherwise go to work for Apple or Google.

Government officials have long wanted to force tech companies to build “back doors” into encrypted devices, so that the companies can help law enforcemen­t descramble messages with a warrant. But security experts warn that doing so would undermine security and privacy for everyone. As Apple CEO Tim Cook pointed out last year, a back door for good guys can also be a back door for bad guys. So far, efforts to pass such a mandate have stalled.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States