Hacked Email
by Stephen P. Cummings, MSW, ACSW, LISW
In June 2019, a report surfaced that the U.S. federal government is considering outlawing the use of electronic encryption. This action is intended to allow law enforcement access to encrypted information on personal devices as part of an investigation of possible illegal activity. Although this report warranted little mention in most news feeds, this development raises concerns related to privacy protection, leading to lasting implications for social workers and the people we serve.
What Is Encryption?
“Encryption” is a broad term that’s often applied liberally to describe processes or steps to protect electronic communication. I’ve seen the term used to describe the scrambling of data shared between specific users, or the simple use of passwords to log in and out of private email. Usually, if passwords are used in the process of encryption, that action of logging in with a password involves converting the protected information into an unreadable code. This scrambling of data prevents unwitting or nefarious outsiders from interpreting what they’re seeing, should they access the information.
In some devices or programs, encryption is built into the design. If you use a PIN code to get past a lock screen on your cellular phone, the content on your phone is most likely encrypted. That’s why using a PIN on your lock screen is a good idea, especially if you include using your mobile device as part of your social work practice.
Popular applications also use encryption as part of their features. For example, I frequently use Evernote, the popular note-taking application. In that application, I’m able to choose to encrypt selected data as an added step to keep information private. (That said, it’s advisable to encrypt everything in order to prevent signaling which areas of your data are most important.)
End-to-End Encryption
Communication applications have “end-to-end” encryption, as well. “End-to-end” describes how information is encrypted in such a way that only the sender and receiver can read the message. Apple's iMessage app and Facebook’s Messenger and WhatsApp are widely-used examples. These companies assert these applications make use of end-to-end encryption to maintain user privacy. The implication here is that even staff at Apple and Facebook can’t read the messages you send or receive. It’s here where things get political.
Social Workers and Encryption
From a social work perspective, end-to-end encryption is good for practice. If you’ve agreed to communicate with clients via a mobile messenger application, or complete process notes electronically, encryption is a step to ensure privacy in communication.
Social workers should also be aware that, while having the ability to keep the app provider from seeing the messages being shared is a desirable feature, it allows illegal and harmful data to move without detection, as well. For example, end-to-end encryption makes child pornography easier to share undetected, and human trafficking or terrorism easier to facilitate.
The Future of Encryption
This is the argument the Trump administration is reported to be making. The administration is looking at the possibility of outlawing end-to-end encryption, at least to the extent that law enforcement could access otherwise private information. The stated intent is to reduce harm. However, this trade-off will put at risk the ability to maintain private conversations safe from spying, whether that spying is the government or individuals looking to obtain information inappropriately.
For example, encryption ensures privacy from abusers seeking to track and cause harm to former partners. Removing this protection adds additional risk to those seeking refuge from abusers.
Implications for Social Work
The matter of privacy is complicated. I don’t find the premise of the argument against encryption completely without merit. Yet, the idea that encryption could be outlawed is chilling, and doing so would be eradicating privacy protections the people we serve should expect. Maintaining privacy is essential for effective social work.
The recently updated language of the NASW Code of Ethics states that “social workers need to be aware of the unique challenges that may arise in relation to the maintenance of confidentiality, informed consent, professional boundaries, professional competence, record keeping, and other ethical considerations.” In Section 1.07 (Privacy and Confidentiality), the Code states that social workers take reasonable steps to maintain client privacy, and use reasonable safeguards. Encryption is one of these tools.
In a quickly-changing digital landscape, I anticipate communication through electronic methods will continue to increase. The landscape, and the apps we will use there, will most certainly look different by the end of the next decade. Removing privacy protections now could make maintaining client privacy more difficult in the future as the scope of electronic communication shifts. Weakening privacy protection also affects macro social work. As the American Civil Liberties Union has noted, weakening encryption makes the public more susceptible to cyberattacks and weakens the ability of dissidents, whistleblowers, and supporters of human rights to organize.
Resources
Geller, E. (2019, June 27). "Trump officials weigh encryption crackdown.” Politico. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/27/trump-officials-weigh-encryption-crackdown-1385306
Abdo, A. (2015, February 11). “ACLU to UN: Encryption is not a problem to solved, but a crucial tool for freedom and security.” American Civil Liberties Union. https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/aclu-un-encryption-not-problem-be-solved-crucial-tool-freedom-and-security
NASW Code of Ethics. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/
Nield, D. (2017, September 4). “Why you should be encrypting everything on your devices and how to easily do it.” Gizmodo. https://gizmodo.com/why-you-should-be-encrypting-your-devices-and-how-to-ea-1798698901
Stephen P. Cummings, MSW, ACSW, LISW, is a clinical assistant professor at the University of Iowa School of Social Work, where he is the administrator for distance education.