Why Is The FBI Afraid Of Encryption?

Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr +

By Derrick Broze

FBI Director Christopher Wray declared the bureau’s inability to access encrypted electronic devices a “major public safety issue.”

New York City – On Tuesday the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations discussed the danger posed by encryption of electronic devices. Speaking at the International Conference on Cyber Security in New York, FBI Director Christopher Wray spoke about challenges that encryption presents to law enforcement.

“We face an enormous and increasing amount of cases that rely heavily if not almost exclusively on electronic evidence,” Wray stated. “We also face a situation where we are increasingly unable to access that information, despite have lawful authority to do so.”

The FBI has been fighting to crack encryption on phones and laptops for several years. In fact, this is not the first time Wray has spoken against encryption. Once appointed by Donald Trump, Wray wasted no time promoting the idea that encryption was something that could actually harm – rather than help – the people. Wray and the FBI argue that terrorists will use encryption to plan terror attacks. Of course, this is a possibility, but there are also plenty of innocent, free human beings who want to protect their data and do so via encryption.


We’re creating viewer supported news. Become a member! Click Here!


The FBI previously attempted to force Apple to unlock an iPhone as part of an investigation into the 2015 attacks in San Bernardino, California. Apple and other tech companies have so far fought the FBI’s efforts, stating that giving investigators access to a suspect’s cellphone will set a dangerous precedent for Internet security.

Director Wray also noted that the bureau was unable to access data from 7,775 devices in the 2017 fiscal year that ended September 30. “Being unable to access nearly 7,800 devices in a year is a major public safety issue,” Wray stated. “That’s more than half of the devices we attempted to access.”

The director stated that a solution will require “significant innovation.” He also defended the FBI against allegations that the bureau is against encryption altogether.

Let me be clear, the FBI supports information security, we support strong encryption, but information security programs need to be thoughtfully designed so they don’t undermine the lawful tools we need to keep this country safe.

The question is, should the American people trust the FBI to keep them safe? This is the same agency that has been proven to entrap unstable individuals and claim they saved the day from big bad terrorists. This is also the same agency that has been involved in violent house raids in other nations, spying on activists, building a secret massive facial recognition database, secretly recording the public, and the list goes on. Are these really the people we should trust when they say the must break encryption and violate our privacy to keep us safe?

Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist and liberty activist. He is the Lead Investigative Reporter for ActivistPost.com and the founder of the TheConsciousResistance.com. Follow him on Twitter. Derrick is the author of three books: The Conscious Resistance: Reflections on Anarchy and Spirituality and Finding Freedom in an Age of Confusion, Vol. 1, Finding Freedom in an Age of Confusion, Vol. 2 and Manifesto of the Free Humans.

Derrick is available for interviews. Please contact [email protected]

Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Steemit, and BitChute. Ready for solutions? Subscribe to our premium newsletter Counter Markets.

This article may be freely reposted in part or in full with author attribution and source link.

Image credit: Pixabay

Share.

About Author

Much of the daily content we publish is notable to us for various reasons. Having said that, the views and opinions expressed in this content, (articles, videos or any other content), are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the authors of this site. As always, please do your own research. Please do not believe what you are told. Take what you like, and leave the rest.

1 Comment

  1. What a lying toad Christopher Wray must be. 

    The chances of the FBI having not secured tools with the consent of Apple in order to access any of their phones is zero, as the arrival of encryption for consumers was not hard to foresee and the FBI have the authority to force collusion. 

    The practical course to cover up that collusion, is to publicly declare a “weakness” and to be “begging” permission to overcome it.  The FBI’s faux admission of vulnerability elicits both the desired public sympathy AND clears a path for a greater power grab. 

    Incidentally, I did hear at a security meeting once that although it is legal to email an encrypted text document to a correspondent, it is ILLEGAL to encrypt that same file a second time (making it an encrypted encrypted document) and then email it.  The double encryption is apparently uncrackable and therefore constitutes an offence.  I’d be grateful if someone can find the primary sources for this assertion ??

Leave A Reply

Scroll Up

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close