Europol Chief Warns About Computer Encryption

An anonymous reader writes The law enforcement lobbying campaign against encryption continues. Today it's Europol director Rob Wainwright, who is trying to make a case against encryption. "It's become perhaps the biggest problem for the police and the security service authorities in dealing with the threats from terrorism," he explained. "It's changed the very nature of counter-terrorist work from one that has been traditionally reliant on having good monitoring capability of communications to one that essentially doesn't provide that anymore." This is the same man who told the European Parliament that Europol is not going to investigate the alleged NSA hacking of the SWIFT (international bank transfer) system. The excuse he gave was not that Europol didn't know about it, because it did. Very much so. It was that there had been no formal complaint from any member state.

Comments

Oh For Crying Out Loud

[Anonymous Coward]

Encryption isn't new so why are they crying about it now? It makes no sense unless they are trying to sneak another fast one by the rubes in the general public. Tell your elected officials to stop whining about encryption and embrace it. Also, tell them we're tired of all these invasions to our rights to privacy because of an existential threat.

No, encryption is NOT going away and you're not getting a back door. Eff off and get to work on something useful and stop playing games!

Re:Oh For Crying Out Loud

[Hadlock]

PGP isn't exactly known for being user friendly. Gmail does not support it out of the box. The average person just can't be expected to understand that kind of cryptography.
 
That said, if you encrypt the device, encrypt the transport method, and the receiving device, that's pretty damn secure in about 98% of situations. WhatsApp just rolled out end to end encryption for their service as well, and they only charge a dollar a year (I think). That's encryption the average person can use. When an 18 year old mother of two in Sao Paulo can review her grocery list with her mother via secure encryption and neither of them know they're even doing it, that's a whole new level of secure. Compare that to the plain text emails I get from my boss about what I might consider vastly more important things at the office.
 
The golden era of unencrypted plaintext email is just about dead, I think, is the problem for intelligence agencies. At least for those people outside of gleaming glass corporate offices.

Re:Oh For Crying Out Loud

[Anonymous Coward]

When an 18 year old mother of two in Sao Paulo can review her grocery list with her mother via secure encryption and neither of them know they're even doing it, that's a whole new level of secure.

Sounds like the kind of secure you wouldn't notice if it was disabled.

Europol is not investigative

[Anonymous Coward]

Europol not investigating is not strange. That is not their job. Cross border investigations are handled by the police in the memberstates, but with coordination from europol.

Whatever people believe, europol is not an european fbi. Although, it would probably improve things if they did become one...

Your Fault

[Bob9113]

"It's changed the very nature of counter-terrorist work from one that has been traditionally reliant on having good monitoring capability of communications to one that essentially doesn't provide that anymore."

You backed us into a corner by monitoring non-suspects.

It's your fault.

Dickhead.

Re:Your Fault

[Bob9113]

I'm gonna pretend you're actually interested in the answer, but let's face it, we're really talking past each other, to our fellow Slashdotters. Thank you for smoking.

The reason for the mass move to encryption -- like Wikipedia and Google moving to default HTTPS, and people like me working on making encryption more approachable by the masses -- was the revelation that non-suspects were being monitored. That is why there is now a haystack within which to hide the needles, and that is why the encryption is now too strong for the intelligence agencies to break when we really want them to be able to.

Moreover, while I'm here, and since I want terrorists to get caught, let me add this: The solution is not increasing the level of distrust between citizens and government. The solution is restoring the reasonable, moderated, level of trust that we used to have in the executive branch. That starts with the ones who created the rift, and that is not the people who were sending all their traffic in the clear; it is the assholes who recorded it all and denied they were doing it.

Because obviously..

[Altrag]

Of course, terrorists are well known as the most law abiding citizens on the planet.

Or maybe this guy thinks the universe will just make prime numbers and whatnot stop working because he doesn't like what they can do.

Both are equally likely to produce useful counter-terrorism results.

When every citizen is a potential terrorist...

[MindPrison]

...then we have a problem with government.

Re:When every citizen is a potential terrorist...

[Zocalo]

I suspect that's actually the underlying problem for the security & intelligence services. It's not so much the fact that regular citizens are starting to use encryption that they have a problem with so much as through the use of encryption by default they're losing the ability to find the more interesting chatter by simply looking for people that are even using encryption in the first place. When your entire haystack is made out of needles, finding the few you are actually interested in becomes that many orders of magnitude harder.

Well, screw that. What they are basically saying is "make our jobs easier for us", but what they are failing to point out is that by doing so they are also leaving people exposed to everyone else that might want to eavesdrop on random communications, and in particular all those people/organizations/countries that they are meant to be securing each other against. If *you* have access to it, then so do your opponents - so the real question, and the one that really needs to be addressed, is which is the lesser of the two evils - having your nation secure from outsiders, or making the job of securing your nation against internal threats slightly easier? Given the complete failure of the security & intelligence services to demonstrate they can achieve the latter even before encryption become a big issue I'd say that's a complete no brainer.

He thinks it is bad now?

[Karmashock]

Given the arrogance of the NSA and other national security agencies, they can expect encryption to increase radically. This is a natural consequence of their refusal to abide by due process as well as generally doing whatever the hell they want because they "can".

That attitude is a double edged sword. And they are just now feeling the bite of the other edge as the global community responds to their behavior.

Not only will the sophistication of encryption spread by it will go from being an option to being a default status quo. In the not too distant future, if they want access to data, they will need to get the cooperation of the owner of that data... or get nothing at all.

How many people called it here?

[Thanshin]

Someone should make a query that extracts the Slashdot commentaries that have predicted this exact situation for a decade.

The prediction goes like this : "If you keep doing stupid shit like that, people will start encrypting their computers and communications to protect themselves from your unimportant shit and this will help the very few people who encrypt their computers and communications to hide serious crimes."

The more you turn everyone into a criminal, the harder it will be to find the actual criminals.

It's time to decriminalize the population, so people become once again able to distinguish between the guilty and the innocent.

Re:How many people called it here?

[Pi1grim]

But the point is not to catch real criminals, the point is to dig up dirt on anyone and everyone, so when the time is right - you could use it to your advantage.

"Don't you see it's for your own protection, and for your children, protecting all of your from pedophiles, terrorists and the scary monster in your closet. And if you don't buy this argument, then obviously you are an enemy of the state, because if you don't have anything to hide - you have nothing to fear. Oh, and don't forget - arbeit macht frei."

Snooping agencies will fight tooth and nail to keep their snooping powers because they don't give a rat's behind about the read bad muthus out there - because that's entirely different playing field, you can't go after them directly, they are well protected and shifting balance includes a lot of political play, but the smaller fishes can be caught with a wider net, and to get leverage all you need is a right to snoop on anyone at any point in time. It's too convenient to give up.