Anonymity, Encryption, and Propaganda

This is an incomplete draft

-- By EthanThomas - 03 Mar 2017

Introduction

I. The Growing Need for Anonymity and Privacy

A. The Demand for Protected Communication Is Legitimate

Discuss here the importance of privacy, its relationship to autonomy, and the legal and historical protections thereof

B. The Need for Protected Communication Is Stronger Than Ever

Discuss here encroachments into private communications by the government as well as private actors

II. Hidden in Plain Sight: The Government's Vilification of Encryption

The government has taken a strong stance against secure means of communication, and encryption in particular, by highlighting instances where criminals or terrorists use these tools, perpetuating the "if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" narrative,(1) and insisting that privacy is compatible with uninhibited government access to records and communications. These tactics and the overall message against encryption ignore legitimate need for the technology, and they reveal troubling motives to the government's approach to technology, privacy, and free speech.

A. Association with Criminality and Delegitimization

One tactic that has recently gained favor is to associate secure or anonymous communication with terrorism. To be sure, the association of tools the government dislikes with criminal behavior is not a new phenomenon. The current narrative, however, creates a strong tie between criminality and the use of certain technologies that aims to stigmatize their use.

In one report (by a private firm), Tor, VPN services, and several messaging applications are identified as "Tech for Jihad."(2) Tor in particular has gained a reputation as "the web broswer for criminals,"(3) merely because it helps to anonymize users. Telegraph, an app which can send encrypted and self-deleting messages, has been identified as "the app of choice for jihadists."(4)

The government has itself played a role in associating privacy-protecting or anonymizing tools with criminality. For instance,

B. Flaws, Motives, and Dangers of This Campaign

Importantly, this message is not only pushed by the govenrnment, but media perpetuates it as well.(5) The treatment of encryption and anonymity is thus largely akin to propaganda.(6) This treatment makes sense: encryption is easy to implement and access (for example, RSA encryption utilizes basic number theory, and a simple program can ccreate extremely difficult-to-break encryption), so the best way to keep people from it is to treat it as if it were dangerous or presumptively criminal. In other words, the goal is to change behavior through misinformation and fear, rather than through direct enforcement. This is at its core self-censorship and self-regulation, gradually imposed on the citizenry.

Not only does anonymity have Constitutional underpinnings in the publishing context,(7) but the ability to speak and communicate anonymously in a world where everything is monitored and recorded is paramount to privacy.(8) Indeed, anonymity is one of three key components of privacy, the other two being secrecy (which encryption and secure communication tools help protect) and autonomy.

While anonymity and secrecy are directly offended by a war on encryption, autonomy is also a victim. As discussed above, the persistent threat of monitoring and censorship severely limits the ability to express, act, and ultimately think on one's own. The notion that people who seek to act autonomously by guaranteeing freedom from these intrusions are dangerous (or even criminal) demonstrates a troubling lack of respect for these principles of autonomy from those in power, but also threatens to suppress expression and uninhibited behavior by making individuals and communities police themselves. If people are told that they have nothing to hide if they have done nothing wrong, and companies adopt this narrative by prohibiting customers from using anonymizing tools,(9)

III. Moving Forward and Embracing Technology as a Defender of Autonomy

Notes

1 : cite an example

2 : See Flashpoint, Tech for Jihad, https://www.flashpoint-intel.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/TechForJihad.pdf

3 : See Business Insider, Comcast Denies It Will Cut Off Customers Who Use Tor, The Web Browser For Criminals, http://www.businessinsider.com/comcast-threatens-to-cut-off-tor-users-2014-9

4 : See Washington Post, The ‘app of choice’ for jihadists: ISIS seizes on Internet tool to promote terror, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/the-app-of-choice-for-jihadists-isis-seizes-on-internet-tool-to-promote-terror/2016/12/23/a8c348c0-c861-11e6-85b5-76616a33048d_story.html

5 : Note that all citations in Part II.A are to media articles.

6 : cite some definition

7 : McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514 U.S. 334 (1995).

8 : See id. at 342 (""The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. Whatever the motivation may be, at least in the field of literary endeavor, the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry."); see also Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60, 64-65 ("Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all. . . . The old seditious libel cases in England show the lengths **539 to which government had to go to find out who was responsible for books that were obnoxious *65 to the rulers.")

9 : See Business Insider, Comcast Denies It Will Cut Off Customers Who Use Tor, The Web Browser For Criminals, http://www.businessinsider.com/comcast-threatens-to-cut-off-tor-users-2014-9; see also PC World, Google's Schmidt Roasted for Privacy Comments, http://www.pcworld.com/article/184446/googles_schmidt_roasted_for_privacy_comments.html (citing Schmidt's comment that "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place . . . .")

---