Joining other western countries, the Trump administration is said to be considering effectively banning end-to-end encryption by mandating back doors, according to a Politico report late last week.

End-to-end encryption is a system of communication where only the communicating users can read the messages. Providing the ultimate level of privacy to users, the system is also a bane for law enforcement because messages cannot be intercepted and read.

Law enforcement is making the push to ban end-to-end encryption. A National Security Council meeting heard Wednesday that effectively banning it by mandating back doors would make it easier for law enforcement and intelligence agents to access suspects’ data.

But ending end-to-end encryption would also create a security nightmare that could make it easier for hackers to steal data as well, a number of security experts told SiliconANGLE this week.

Banning encryption or opening back doors won’t work and can potentially undermine overall internet security, said.Willy Leichter, vice president of application protection firm Virsec Systems Inc.

“Encryption is simply advanced mathematics and banning math is like banning an idea – it won’t just go away,” Leichter explained. “Practically unbreakable encryption algorithms are widely available – if a U.S.-based service can’t provide end-to-end encryption, then dozens more will pop up outside the country that are equally effective. And if one government requires ‘secret’ backdoors, then many others will follow and the encryption needed for privacy and day-to-day business will no longer be effective.”

Indeed, this is just another case of politicians trying to legislate something they don’t understand, said Kevin Bocek, vice president of security strategy and threat intelligence at cybersecurity firm Venafi Inc.

“The message just doesn’t seem to be getting through: If you undermine encryption, create a backdoor, then you will weaken security defenses that are used by our very own government,” Bocek said. “It’s a really bad idea. Once a back door is created, it won’t stay secret for long and will just create blueprints for cyberattackers to steal private data and sneak into encrypted communications.”

Banning this encryption might even be a boon for authoritarian governments, added Dan Tuchler, chief marketing officer at data security company SecurityFirst Corp.

“Often there is a fine line between positions on an issue, but on this one there is no gray area,” he said. “An authoritarian government will always seek to exert control by monitoring its citizens, using the reasoning that safety of citizens is more important than any erosion of their rights.”

Tuchler noted that the U.S. has a long history of mottos such as “Live Free or Die” emphasizing that the balance should always lean toward freedom of speech. “We don’t like it when suspected terrorists have the ability to communicate on encrypted channels, but we need to catch them a different way so that we can protect one of our most important fundamental rights,” he said.

Officially the Trump administration has not yet taken a stance on banning end-to-end encryption. But with the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice said to be behind the push to ban it, what’s discussed today could possibly become law in the near future.

Image: Pixabay