{"id":6409,"date":"2019-10-16T16:43:00","date_gmt":"2019-10-16T20:43:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ncjolt.org\/?p=6409"},"modified":"2020-06-04T20:52:24","modified_gmt":"2020-06-04T20:52:24","slug":"facebooks-end-to-end-encryption-plans-and-their-role-in-the-online-child-sexual-abuse-epidemic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/blogs\/facebooks-end-to-end-encryption-plans-and-their-role-in-the-online-child-sexual-abuse-epidemic\/","title":{"rendered":"Facebook\u2019s End-to-End Encryption Plans and Their Role in the Online Child Sexual Abuse Epidemic"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

According to a report<\/a>\non online child sexual abuse, rates of online child abuse and exploitation have\nincreased exponentially in the past few years. Online child abuse and\nexploitation can take on many forms, but the most prevalent types of these\ncybercrimes are the sexual solicitation of minors and the sharing of sexually\nexplicit photos of minors. <\/p>\n\n\n

There is a common misconception that online child sexual\nabuse only occurs in the dark, deep web online. However, the child sexual\nexploitation market may be a little closer than we realize. Just last year, Facebook\nmade 16.8\nmillion reports<\/a> to the US National Center for Missing & Exploited\nChildren (NCMEC) which accounted for 90% of the total reports of child sexual\nexploitation made. Facebook\u2019s reporting of suspicious activity, solicitation of\nminors, and explicit photo sharing of minors via their website has played a key\nrole in online child sexual abuse prevention. <\/p>\n\n\n

However, on March 19, 2019, Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Facebook, announced plans<\/a> to move Facebook Messenger toward a more secure, private messaging system. The shift includes end-to-end encryption for the platform, which prevents anyone\u2014including Facebook\u2014from having access to the messages. Zuckerberg maintains that the drive behind the transition to encryption is Facebook user\u2019s privacy and security. <\/p>\n\n\n

End-to-end encryption of messaging platforms has many benefits<\/a>\nto users. Because data breaches are becoming more and more common, users are\ndemanding a more private form of communication and assurance that their data\nwill be protected. These users are worried about any and all forms of data\nbreaches. Breaches including the stealing of trade secrets of a corporation to hacking\ninto personal identification information, such as social security numbers and\ncredit card information. End-to-end encryption, one of the most secure form of\nencryption, greatly reduces the possibility of a breach. How do we reconcile\nour need for online protection and privacy with law enforcement\u2019s need for access\nto prevent the exploitation of millions of children?<\/p>\n\n\n

According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited\nChildren, 70%<\/a>\nof Facebook\u2019s reporting would be lost with the implementation of end-to-end\nencryption. However, in his post<\/a>,\nZuckerberg did address Facebook\u2019s continued dedication to online child sexual\nexploitation prevention. \u201cWe have a responsibility to work with law enforcement\nand to help prevent these wherever we can. We are working to improve our\nability to identify and stop bad actors across our apps by detecting patterns\nof activity or through other means, even when we can’t see the content of the\nmessages, and we will continue to invest in this work.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n

In response to the Zuckerberg\u2019s plans, the Justice\nDepartment, in an open\nletter<\/a> to Mark Zuckerberg on October 4, 2019, pled Facebook not to proceed\nwith its plans to incorporate end-to-end encryption into Facebook Messenger. The\nDOJ\u2019s main concern is that it has not yet seen any concrete plans for balancing\nFacebook\u2019s new end-to-end encryption with its commitment to prevention of\nonline child sexual exploitation. The letter urges Facebook not to proceed with\nany end-to-end encryption plans while also urging the social media site to allow\nlaw enforcement access to certain content necessary in the prevention of these\ntypes of heinous crimes.   <\/p>\n\n\n

While Facebook has yet to formally respond to the DOJ\u2019s open\nletter, Facebook has\nstated<\/a> that they \u201cstrongly oppose\ngovernment attempts to build backdoors because they would undermine the privacy\nand security of people everywhere.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n

Although end-to-end encryption is a significant barrier in the fight against online child sexual abuse and exploitation, dismantling encryption entirely would not only leave many Americans vulnerable to data breaches and hackers, but also lead to broader surveillance generally. Where should Facebook, and other similar social media platforms, stand on the issue? Should Facebook continue on its path toward a more secure, private web space? Or continue its work fighting the online abuse and exploitation of children? Is it possible to do both?<\/p>\n\n\n

Sarah B. Kirschbaum <\/p>\n\n\n

October 16, 2019<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

According to a report on online child sexual abuse, rates of online child abuse and exploitation have increased exponentially in the past few years. Online child abuse and exploitation can take on many forms, but the most prevalent types of these cybercrimes are the sexual solicitation of minors and the sharing of sexually explicit photos …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6406,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[51],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6409"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6409"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6409\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6798,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6409\/revisions\/6798"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6406"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6409"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6409"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6409"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}