Monday, May 2, 2016

Research Project Proposal

Pedrhom Nafisi
ENC 1102
Dr. Taylor
Initial Research Proposal                                                   
Encryption: Why it is Needed and Why Politics Think Otherwise
            With the acts of terrorism that has occurred last year across the world such as the bombings of Paris and Lebanon, many national governments including the United States are trying to minimize terrorist communication by proposing an encryption ban. The government wants the ability to track discourse between potentially threatening individuals that converse over publicly used applications. A recent example of this includes a case in which an ISIL-associated terrorist group was allegedly using a popular mobile messaging application called WhatsApp along with encryption to talk in secret (Goodnight). As a reaction to this and other cases, the government has begun to take action against encryption and has tried to ban out the ability to use it with the justification that encryption is for hackers and terrorists. The problem is that banning encryption is not the correct path for the government to take as encryption is needed in everyday internet security for businesses that want to have secure data.
            My goal in researching the topic of encryption is to justify its legality and express how crucial it is for devices and programs to have the ability to encrypt data to protect an individual’s privacy. One article discusses that it is not harder for the FBI to track criminal activity compared to fifteen years ago, data was still hidden on private computers and unflagged phone calls could have a transcript not available to the government (Brandom). In today’s world more information is stored online and is equally as private as it was fifteen years ago and for the government to want to be entitled to data based on the fact that information is more accessible is unjustifiable.  I am also going to address the proposed ban on encryption that was created by British Prime Minister David Cameron who wants to ban out messaging services such as iMessage and Snapchat (Brown). This issue is being addressed by not only the government, but also by all cryptologists who are professionals when it comes to encryption. They also agree that the course of action of the government will not solve their problems and that removing encryption makes the world less secure. A source I want to use for this topic is a UCF staff member that is proficient in computer security and digital forensics. I can interview the expert to get more insight behind encryption and get their opinion about the topic of the government’s proposal on encryption. More sources I can use are online news articles that critique what the government is trying to do in regards to encryption and another source can be a document that describes what society would be like if encryption was banned.
            My research conducted so far has given me support that removing encryption will be more destructive than constructive in regards to security. Many individuals from bloggers to cryptology experts are bashing the government’s plan as they all have seen the faults that removing encryption can and will create. These articles show me that my stance on this issue is supportable and tenable.
           

Bibliography:

Brown, Aaron. "WhatsApp BAN: Cameron's EU Referendum will Decide Fate of Encrypted Messaging App." Sunday Express. 15 July 2015. Web. 14 Feburary 2016.
Goodnight, Eric Z. "What is Encryption, and Why Are People Afraid of It?" 30 November 2015. Web. 14 Feburary 2016.
Brandom, Russell. "The Five Big Lies of the Encryption Debate." The Verge. Vox Media, 12 Jan. 2016. Web. 17 Feb. 2016.

No comments:

Post a Comment