Perhaps it's due to the recently televised presidential debates. Or perhaps it's a sign of the times in which we live. Either way, the topic of data encryption is hotter than ever.
On one side we have the pro-encryption camp that insists on maintaining encryption without backdoors or master keys of any kind. Once data is encrypted, only the sender and receiver will know what was sent. On the other side of the debate are those who believe special circumstances dictate when data can and should be decrypted through due process.
There's no doubt that valid points are made on both sides of the issue. Yet, you'll find that the majority of IT security professionals and technology companies are coming out against any method to weaken encryption standards. This obviously includes backdoors and storing encryption keys.
The US government seems to be changing its tune regarding what it is requesting from technology vendors in terms of data decryption capabilities. Until recently, federal law enforcement agencies were demanding complete backdoor access to encrypted applications. This would have given the US government the unfettered ability to decrypt data with little public oversight.
In fall 2015, the US government dropped the "backdoor" verbiage and now is requesting that technology vendors "maintain their ability to comply with state and local judges' warrants" by storing encryption keys for the government. When warrants are served that demand decryption of data on devices such as PCs, smartphones, and tablets, technology vendors would have to comply with these requests.
Many technology companies -- including Apple, Cisco, Google, and Microsoft -- have already made it clear that they don't want to create backdoors. Nor do they want to store encryption keys for the government. Their reason? It significantly decreases the effectiveness of encryption -- a critical component of an IT security posture. Businesses are under pressure to protect customer information, intellectual property, and other sensitive data from getting into the wrong hands. Handicapping encryption weakens their ability to meet that goal.
We break down the encryption debate, as it stands today. By exploring eight key factors influencing the discussion, we aim to reflect the thought processes on both sides of the debate -- and explain why the vast majority of IT professionals and technology vendors oppose altering their encryption protocols at the request of various governments around the world. Once you've reviewed these considerations, tell us what you think in the comments section below.
**Elite 100 2016: DEADLINE EXTENDED TO JAN. 15, 2016** There's still time to be a part of the prestigious InformationWeek Elite 100! Submit your company's application by Jan. 15, 2016. You'll find instructions and a submission form here: InformationWeek's Elite 100 2016.
Andrew has well over a decade of enterprise networking under his belt through his consulting practice, which specializes in enterprise network architectures and datacenter build-outs and prior experience at organizations such as State Farm Insurance, United Airlines and the ... View Full Bio
Top IT Trends to Watch in Financial ServicesIT pros at banks, investment houses, insurance companies, and other financial services organizations are focused on a range of issues, from peer-to-peer lending to cybersecurity to performance, agility, and compliance. It all matters.
Join us for a roundup of the top stories on InformationWeek.com for the week of September 18, 2016. We'll be talking with the InformationWeek.com editors and correspondents who brought you the top stories of the week to get the "story behind the story."