The use of encryption can have adverse effects on incident response and incident investigations; however, from a security standpoint, encryption is a major component in network confidentiality. Present your argument for or against an “universal key” which would allow investigators the ability to decrypt data for an investigation. State your position and back-up your stance with 5 or 6 sentences supporting your stance from information you found in related cases or arguments made in online publications. Do not plagurize, use your own words when presenting.
provide replies to below discussions each in 150 words
Encryption is widely used on the internet to protect user-information being sent between a browser and a server, including passwords, payment information and other personal information that should be considered private. Organizations and individuals also commonly use encryption to protect sensitive data stored on computers, servers and mobile devices like phones or tablets. It protects our vital infrastructure and our communications network, the power grid and everything else. And as we move to the Internet of Things with its cars and thermostats and medical devices, all of which can destroy life and property, if hacked and misused, encryption will become even more critical to our security.
Strong encryption means unbreakable encryption. Any weakness in encryption will be exploited by hackers, by criminals, and by terrorists. The investigators want the ability to bypass encryption during a criminal investigation. This is known as â€œback doorâ€, because itâ€™s a way at which the encrypted information that bypasses the normal encryption mechanisms. A back door, if present, leaves digital information vulnerable to a whole host of people, if anyone with bad intentions gets a hold of this universal Key, whether it be terrorists, identity thieves, they could do all sorts of damage. If a back door exists, then anyone can exploit it. All it takes is knowledge of the back door and the capability to exploit it. And while it might temporarily be a secret, itâ€™s a fragile secret.
This means that If the FBI can eavesdrop on your conversations or get into your computers without your knowledge, so can cybercriminals or so can terrorists. Back door weakens us against all sorts if threats.
Either we build encryption systems to keep everyone secure, or we build them to leave everybody vulnerable.
Even a highly sophisticated back door that could only be exploited will leave us vulnerable to cybercriminals tomorrow. Thatâ€™s just the way technology works. Give FBI the ability to hack into a cell phone today and tomorrow you will hear reports that a criminal group used the same ability to hack into your power greed.
There is much more at stake than the information in the terroristâ€™s device.
I think the government should be able to request access to the specific device they are investigating, but in such a way that does not open up a â€œback doorâ€ or â€œuniversal keyâ€ to every device. It would be an ideal solution. Regardless, though, the FBI should not be demanding a universal key. Its an invasion of privacy for people and threatens cybersecurity worldwide if others gain access to it. I believe that the strength of encryption shouldnâ€™t be sacrificed for an entire nation just to solve one crime. The FBI must remember that it is the business not just of crime-solving, but even more important, of crime prevention.
Data encryption is a kind of translation of data into code or alphabetical or numerical form. Encrypting a data is mainly referred to as ciphertext and it is very hard to access or break the code. It mainly used by many organizations to assure the secrecy and protection of data or information from data breaching or cyber-attacks. Besides these advantages, encryption can also cause a few negative impacts on the incident response or investigation (Barker & Mouha, 2017). Foremost it can be observed that having the authority to access the encryption by any sole individual may create suspicion. Therefore, forgetting the passwords or codes may lead to critical situation and thus incident responses can be a little bit difficult. Secondly, maintenance of the encrypted data is very hard as it can be problematic later if the encrypted key is lost or misplaced. More often, it is very relevant not to share the encrypted design of data more than a singular person is. The main reason for that thought is because it is against the secrecy policy and the probability of risks is more in such cases.
There is a debate among many for having a universal key of the encrypted data is beneficial or not. Therefore, it is very important for very investigators to keep a universal key for data decryption other than the authorized owner of accessing the data. Such a solution can help them to investigate any incident properly if the key gets lost or password is forgotten (Yang et al., 2015). However, many do not support the fact for having a universal key for data encryption because it is presumed such doings can instigate the chances of data breaching and hacking more. It is because if everybody has that universal key then the codes of the data can be easily broken or crack by anyone.