New encryption technology is aiding terrorists, intelligence director says

New, commercially available encryption software 'had and is having major, profound effects on our ability' to collect intelligence, 'particularly against terrorists,' James Clapper told reporters at a Monitor-hosted breakfast.

Michael Bonfigli /The Christian Science Monitor
James Clapper, director of National Intelligence, speaks at the St. Regis Hotel on April 25 in Washington, D.C.

The Edward Snowden leaks have accelerated the sophistication of encryption technologies by “about seven years,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told reporters this morning. 

And that is not a development to be celebrated, he added in remarks at a breakfast hosted by The Christian Science Monitor. 

“From our standpoint, it’s not a good thing.” 

New, commercially available encryption software “had and is having major, profound effects on our ability” to collect intelligence, “particularly against terrorists,” he warned.

That’s in large part because the Islamic State is “the most sophisticated user by far of the Internet.” They privately purchase software that “to ensure end-to-end encryption” of their communications.

“And so that is a major inhibitor to discerning plotting, principally by ISIL and others,” Mr. Clapper said, using one acronym for the Islamic State.

The seven year estimation comes from the National Security Agency, he said. 

It raises the issue of the tension between the need for security against cyber attacks – which as recently as February Clapper cited as a greater threat than terrorism – and the opposition to law enforcement against so-called unbreakable encryption software that, they say, could hinder their search for terrorists. 

Clapper for his part echoed President Obama’s warning against “absolutist positions” on the topic. “Somehow, we need to find a balance here,” he said. “I don’t know the technicalities of how we might arrive here, how we thread the needle” between how to “ensure privacy and security on an individual basis, as well as security in the context of what’s best for the collective good.”

At the moment, he added, that goal “is an elusive holy grail that we’re pursuing.”

That said, he warned that the development of unbreakable encryption, which he likened to the possibility that that it could, in essence, “give the terrorists a pass.” 

Clapper warned Monday that the group has clandestine cells that are plotting more terrorist attacks in Germany, Italy, and England.

To this end, the United States is stepping up efforts to promote more intelligence sharing. In the meantime, since the recent IS attacks on Paris and Brussels, US intelligence officials have learned some things about the terrorist group, he said. 

For starters, they are “very op-sec conscious,” Clapper said. A former Air Force lieutenant general, he was using military parlance for “operational security.”

It is clear that IS is also taking advantage of the migrant crisis in Europe, he added. 

And that poses a formidable challenge for Europe. There is a “fundamental conflict” between European Union incentives and drives to promote openness and free movement of people and goods with privacy, “which is in some ways in conflict with the responsibilities that each country has as a nation-state to protect the borders and securities of their nations and peoples,” Clapper said. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.