UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Apple v FBI: Undermining encryption opens a ‘Pandora’s Box’ for human rights

25 Mar 2016

[International Secretariat]

Region: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Topic:

The briefing, Encryption: A Matter of Human Rights, which is Amnesty International’s first official stance on encryption and human rights, says that people everywhere should be able to encrypt their communications and personal data as an essential protection of their rights to privacy and free speech.

Banning encryption is like banning envelopes and curtains. It takes away a basic tool for keeping your private life private.

“Governments trying to undermine encryption should think twice before they open this Pandora’s Box. Weakening privacy online could have disastrous consequences for free societies, particularly for the human rights activists and journalists who hold our leaders to account.”

Attempts to make companies create a “backdoor” in encryption software and violate international human rights law, because they indiscriminately undermine the security of the communications and private data of anyone using the software.

In the Apple v FBI case, seeking to access the data on the particular phone in question may be legitimate. However, it is the method of accessing it – which would require a company to customize its software in order to defeat its security features – that risks setting the stage for the US government, and potentially other governments, to compel technology companies to modify their products to weaken or otherwise circumvent encryption.

Such “backdoors” not only threaten online privacy, but can also have a chilling effect on the exercise of free expression and expose online communications and individuals' data to security threats such as criminals stealing credit card data.

“Opening a “backdoor” in security for governments risks opening the door to both cyber criminals who want to hack your phone and governments around the world who want to spy on and repress critics.”

With online censorship and surveillance a growing threat to human rights, undermining encryption could threaten the ability of people around the world to freely communicate and use the internet, such as human rights activists who challenge the authorities, journalists who uncover corruption, and lawyers holding powerful governments to account, Amnesty International said.

Several countries already limit who can encrypt their communication or the strength of encryption allowed, such as Cuba, Pakistan and India. Others, such as Russia, Morocco, Kazakhstan, Pakistan and Colombia, sometimes go as far as banning it altogether.

Amnesty International’s briefing sets out limited circumstances in which encryption can be restricted, such as when restrictions are necessary to achieve a legitimate end, and are proportionate to the aim for which they are imposed.

Amnesty International is also calling on companies to provide an adequate level of encryption to protect their personal data.

“Banning or undermining encryption will have one clear result: making us all less secure and undermining our privacy. Some governments are trying to limit encryption, ostensibly for security reasons, but this fails to take into account the serious ramifications that weakening encryption would have for online security. That is short-sighted and misguided,” said Sherif Elsayed-Ali.

22 March 2016
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PRESS RELEASE