rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Unlocking encryption: who watches the watchers?

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

Image: Marcus Spiske/Unsplash

Last year, Australia passed a controversial bill weakening security on the iPhones and software people rely on in today's digital world. This sweeping law could force tech companies to access encrypted data.

Australia is not alone in designing a national security strategy that responds to geopolitical trends, defence needs, and outside interference but also emerging non-traditional security concerns such as climate change, cyber issues, and transnational organized crime. Since all of this is allied to global digitalization, it is no surprise that surveillance and encryption are also the focus of new policies.

In Canada, Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien has said companies that manufacture telecommunication devices have a responsibility to protect the personal information of their customers. But, he argued that companies are also subject to laws and judicial warrants that grant access to personal information that may be legitimately needed when public safety is at risk.

"Finding the right balance between encryption and the needs of law enforcement is a tough nut to crack and I don't think anyone has the exact answer as to where to draw the line at this point," he said. "This is definitely a debate we need to have in Canada."

In August 2019, Citizen Lab, based at the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto, noted that while Canada has "historically opposed the calls of its western allies to undermine the encryption protocols and associated applications that secure Canadians' communications and devices from criminal and illicit activities," this position appears to have changed.

It noted a communique issued in July 2019 by Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States --  all members of the "Five Eyes" intelligence sharing partnership -- which stated, among other things, that:

"Tech companies should include mechanisms in the design of their encrypted products and services whereby governments, acting with appropriate legal authority, can obtain access to data in a readable and usable format."

What this effectively means, in a Canadian context, is that, "the Government of Canada has formally asserted its opposition to the strong encryption relied upon by government employees, politicians, business persons, and citizens and residents of Canada in the course of all of their daily and routine activities," according to Citizen Lab.

In "Protecting Your Security and Rights Online" (Inter Press Service, January 23, 2019) Rebecca Ricks writes:

"At a time when governments across the globe are engaging in increasingly invasive surveillance, unfettered public access to encryption protects our basic rights to privacy and freedom of expression. Users should call on their governments to promote strong encryption, not undercut efforts to protect our safety and rights."

Encryption is supposed to ensure that information stays private by scrambling data so that no one else can see it or read it without a decryption key. In practice, security forces and corporate interests are keen to be able to crack any code. Unfettered public access to encryption is not in their interests.

There are two different types of end-to-end encryption:

  • Symmetric key algorithms that use related or identical encryption keys for both encryption and decryption -- "private-key cryptography."
  • Asymmetric key algorithms that use different keys for encryption and decryption -- "public-key cryptography."

Government agencies have been known to steal keys by removing computers, or by putting malware on them using physical access or phishing attacks. This undoes the protection cryptography offers. It is comparable to having a secure lock on your door, but for someone to copy it and be able to get into your house without picking the lock.

As Ricks points out:

"Access to encrypted tools is critical to maintaining the safety of people who are disproportionately subjected to surveillance and scrutiny, whether victims of domestic abuse or minorities and other marginalized members of society. Political dissidents, journalists, and activists in particular are vulnerable to retaliation for expressing their views or exposing wrongdoing."

How can we address international and national security issues and tackle serious crime such as drug and people trafficking while simultaneously guaranteeing privacy and people's civic rights? What are your views?

Philip Lee is WACC general secretary and editor of its international journal Media Development. His edited publications include The Democratization of Communication (1995), Many Voices, One Vision: The Right to Communicate in Practice (2004); Communicating Peace: Entertaining Angels Unawares (2008); and Public Memory, Public Media, and the Politics of Justice (ed. with Pradip N. Thomas) (2012).

WACC Global is an international NGO that promotes communication as a basic human right, essential to people's dignity and community. It is a member of the ACT Alliance. 

Image: Marcus Spiske/Unsplash

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.