Privacy + Ravn

In reading a recent piece dated April 26, 2018, by cryptographer and professor Matthew Green, we’ve pondered some his conclusions on the topic of Ray Ozzie’s “Clear” proposal regarding accessing phone data. “Clear” is an idea that would provide law enforcement access to encrypted data while not maximizing any security risks for those who use encryption. It would provide complementing keys between the phone (public key) and the vendor (private key) that would unlock information on the phone. These two keys could be used by law enforcement in applicable situations.

Is Clear an invasion of privacy? The topic of privacy is one of the hotter topics of the year, once again, thanks to Facebook’s security breach and Cambridge Analytica. Of course, privacy is generally a desired and expected state but more recently because of some indecent exposures, those who’ve rested comfortably in their bubble are now seeing that privacy is more of a luxury these days and are at the mercy of their providers in one way or another.

Plenty of policies and practices are coming to the forefront as a result. Some are alarming in their porousness. Measures and liberties are both under the gun. Meanwhile, inboxes are getting flooded with emails from companies with subject lines like, “We’re updating our privacy policy” and “We’ve updated our privacy statement with you in mind.” Yet there are still ideas being put on the table to allow strangers to further delve into where you thought was private.

In the case of cell phone privacy, the phone and software companies are more publicly pitted against Government and law enforcement. We can trace all of this back to that saying, that one bad apple can ruin the barrel. It’s unfortunate and it is reality. So when we factor in our own right to privacy (we, being the good guys) we must blanket the bad guys too (as they are innocent until proven guilty.)

It’s complicated on top of complicated and this is just the tip of it. The cell phone companies publicly lean toward protecting their clients until a good resolution surfaces that doesn’t put their users at risk. Is Clear that solution? With a one-stop-shopping key vault, it becomes a hackers dream, so maybe not. And then, beyond hackers, there’s that fundamental human right to privacy which is a simple notion and doesn’t fall under Clear.

Imagine if someone you love was kidnapped and their phone might hold a piece to the puzzle, would you then like the idea of invasion of privacy? On the other side, let’s say your highly secret secrets are in your phone and due to your phone vendor having to comply with certain protocols for the sake of crime and justice; hackers are now able to access the key to unlocking your information to the world and the government also has a right to it.

Want to get even muddier? Not only is what’s right and acceptable up for debate, so is the very technology that supports the Clear proposal. Perhaps the vendors already have the key vaults and they just don’t divulge that tidbit much beyond the heads of the company. We can’t say for certain but what if… So, perhaps Clear could easily come to fruition. But should it? It’s a matter of determining if privacy is indeed privacy. What’s clear is that it’s muddy in every direction unless the lucid human right to privacy is upheld. If it isn’t, and private data should be regarded as accessible in some cases, then so be it and not much is truly private. If ultimate privacy is to be achieved, use Ravn, because since history has been recorded there are those who do good and those who do evil. We don’t imagine that changing based on phone security. Privacy is privacy or it’s not. Go where there is no data, no name collection, no phone number collection, and is 100% private… That’s the Ravn Chat App.