Nevada’s attorney general who escalated a request to the court to ban Meta’s use of encryption for Facebook Messenger users under 18 has faced opposition from the Electronic Frontier Foundation and other organisations which argue that children’s privacy must be protected by such measures.
The brief, opposing a potential ban, was submitted by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Nevada, the Stanford Internet Observatory Research Scholar Riana Pfefferkorn and gained more signatures of support.
After years of lobbying for end-to-end encryption in Facebook’s Messenger app, the EFF is concerned that Meta could be influenced into making an ill-advised U-turn on privacy, whilst the pressure on social media companies to do more to protect children’s safety online increases.
More than ever, social media companies are subject to rules imposed by jurisdictions, such as implementing age verification and encrypting communications.
Bizarrely, Nevada wants to take steps back to ignoring the threats towards our data.
Andrew Crocker, EFF Surveillance Litigation Director suggested the proposal was illogical, arguing that “encryption is the best tool we have for safeguarding our privacy and security online — and privacy and security are especially important for young people”.
“Nevada’s argument that children need to be ‘protected’ from securely communicating isn’t just baffling; it’s dangerous.”
Rather than having ownership of Facebook users’ data, encryption protects against the threats of third parties intercepting messages – whether “they are a criminal, domestic abuser, a foreign despot, or law enforcement—they will not be able to decipher or access the message.”
Nevada is peddling the argument that ending end-to-end encryption on Messenger is necessary as it can impede on criminal investigations.
