IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v5y2017i1p54-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clipper Meets Apple vs. FBI—A Comparison of the Cryptography Discourses from 1993 and 2016

Author

Listed:
  • Matthias Schulze

    (International Relations Department, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Germany)

Abstract

This article analyzes two cryptography discourses dealing with the question of whether governments should be able to monitor secure and encrypted communication, for example via security vulnerabilities in cryptographic systems. The Clipper chip debate of 1993 and the FBI vs. Apple case of 2016 are analyzed to infer whether these discourses show similarities in their arguments and to draw lessons from them. The study is based on the securitization framework and analyzes the social construction of security threats in political discourses. The findings are that the arguments made by the proponents of exceptional access show major continuities between the two cases. In contrast, the arguments of the critics are more diverse. The critical arguments for stronger encryption remain highly relevant, especially in the context of the Snowden revelations. The article concludes that we need to adopt a more general cyber security perspective, considering the threat of cyber crime and state hacking, when debating whether the government should be able to weaken encryption.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthias Schulze, 2017. "Clipper Meets Apple vs. FBI—A Comparison of the Cryptography Discourses from 1993 and 2016," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 54-62.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v5:y:2017:i:1:p:54-62
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v5i1.805
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/805
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v5i1.805?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v5:y:2017:i:1:p:54-62. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.