Vint Cerf


(46:48) If you have a back door, somebody will find it, and that somebody may be a bad guy, and or bad guys, and they will intend, intentionally abuse their access. So creating this kind of technology is super super risky. So I don’t think that that’s the right answer, you know. At the same time, I accept that the Government is there in part to protect their citizens from harm. So the question is, how do you do that. And there is this spectrum. Imagine if, on one hand, we live in a society where there is no privacy at all. Everything is known, everything you are planning to do is known. It might be a very safe society to live in, but might not be the one that you want to live in. On the other hand, what about the society where there is absolute privacy, nobody knows what you are planning to do at all, and bad stuff happens. So you feel that your privacy is protected but your safety is here been diminished. There must be some place in between, and it isn’t the same place for everyone, it isn’t the same place for every culture and it isn’t the same place for every nation. Our job in the US is to figure out where is the balance for us. And I think that the Congress is forced now to struggle with that, and they’re going to have to listen to these various arguments about protection and safety on the one hand, and preservation, privacy and confidentiality on the other, I am not persuaded that building back doors is the right way forward.

3 thoughts on “Vint Cerf

  1. shinichi Post author

    Future of the Internet

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?325750-1/google-vice-president-vint-cerf-future-internet

    Vint Cerf, also known as a co-founder of the Internet, spoke on the future of the Web. He addressed the importance of adopting new technologies to ensure Internet security. Other topics included Internet policy, “net neutrality,” and encryption technology. Following his prepared remarks he answered written questions from audience members.

    Reply
  2. shinichi Post author

    ‘Father of internet’ speaks out against govt demand for back doors in encryption

    RT

    http://rt.com/usa/255561-internet-pioneer-backdoor-surveillance/

    Internet pioneer Vint Cerf said Monday that creating defects in encryption systems for law enforcement, often known as “back doors,” was “super, super risky” and not the “right answer.”

    Cerf, recognized as a “father of the internet,” currently working at Google, told an audience at the National Press Club that he understood law enforcement’s desire to avoid being locked away from evidence that could be used to prevent crimes. He went on to say, however, that providing such access raises constitutional and legal questions.

    “The Congress is forced now to struggle with that, and they’re going to have to listen to these various arguments about protection and safety on the one hand and preservation and privacy and confidentiality on the other,” Cerf said, as reported by The Hill.

    The Obama administration has been trying to force companies like Google and Apple to create defects in encryption so the FBI and other government agencies can gain access to people’s information; this despite mounting criticism over the plan – a criticism that’s shared by Cerf.

    “If you have a back door, somebody will find it, and that somebody may be a bad guy or bad guys, and they will intentionally abuse their access,” said Cerf.

    “Creating this kind of technology is super, super-risky,” he added. “I don’t think that that’s the right answer.”

    Former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden revealed a program codenamed “Bullrun,” which showed that the government penetrated encryption securities through the use of “supercomputers, technical trickery, court orders and behind-the-scenes persuasion.”

    Since those disclosures, Silicon Valley industries have been working feverishly to adopt encryption technology beyond the reach of law enforcement agencies that haven’t first obtained a warrant, and to appease customers worried about their privacy. Law enforcement sees it differently, however.

    “If this becomes the norm, I suggest to you that homicide cases could be stalled, suspects walked free, child exploitation not discovered and prosecuted,” FBI Director James Comey warned in October, reported The Hill.

    For tech companies, though, it is not a question of creating “back doors” or “front doors” – it’s just a matter of secure technology and unsecure technology.

    Last week, a bipartisan group of legislators attempted to add an amendment prohibiting the government from forcing companies to build back doors into their devices to a bill reforming the National Security Agency. Despite full support from House Judiciary Committee members, the measure was dropped over concerns it would sink the underlying bill.

    Reply
  3. shinichi Post author

    (sk)

    ヴィント・サーフ (Vint Cerf) はインターネットについての発言を繰り返してきたが、そのバランス感覚は群を抜いている。例えばプライバシーについて話す時、プライバシーがまったくない社会のことも、プライバシーが完全に守られる社会のことも、絶対に良いとは言わない。

    「もしプライバシーがまったくない社会で暮らしていたら、どうだろう。すべてのことが知られてしまう社会。計画のすべてが知られてしまう社会。それはとても安全な社会かもしれないけれど、誰も住みたいとは思わないだろう。それとは反対に、プライバシーが完全に守られる社会というのは、どうだろう。どんな企みも、企ても、知られることなく、悪いことが起きてしまう社会。プライバシーは守られていると感じるだろうけれど、安全は脅かされてしまう」

    そう言ったあとで、中間というか中庸というか、そういうところはないかという。プライバシーがまったくないのでもなく、プライバシーが完全に守られるのでもない。そんなところ。それは、人によって違うし、文化によって違うし、国によって違うけれど、どんな集団にも、どんな社会にも、必ず落としどころがあるはずだという。他人のことをとやかく言う前に、自分たちにとっての一番のバランスを見つけなければならないという。

    人は、プライバシーが「まったくない」とか「完全に守られる」というように、「白」か「黒」かと考えがちだけれど、「白に近い灰色」や「黒に近い灰色」、それに「青みがかった灰色」や「赤っぽい灰色」を考えなければ、自分たちに合った解決策は見つからない。ヴィント・サーフが言うように、バランスが大事なのだろう。

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.