One of the homework readings said that our stance on the internet versus privacy issue is based on who we fear most: the government or criminals. If we fear criminals more, than we would want a low encryption standard to expedite the government’s job of protecting us from hackers and terrorists. However, if we feared what the government did with our private information, then we would want a higher encryption standard, which then gives criminals the upper hand. There is a saying that the only people who want privacy are those who have something to hide. Who really cares if the government has access to everything you do, as long as you don’t do anything wrong or suspicious. This is where the line becomes thin. What is considered suspicious? As we said in class, innocently looking up murders on the internet for a class could be seen as something much more threatening. Also, if you knew someone was watching you, would you act differently? Would this knowledge of someone constantly surveying your every move make you more likely to not do something wrong, or to just be sneakier about your illicit behavior?
It is very hard to balance between private and national security. But as far as I know, we could not prohibit people using encryption just because it will increase the difficulty to detect criminals for government. Government should improve their skills and techniques about cryptology rather than ban cryptology.
ReplyDelete