US Attorney General William Barr, British and Australian Interior Ministers Prey Patel and Peter Dutton, as well as US Homeland Security Secretary Kevin Macalinan called on Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg to postpone the implementation of end-to-end encryption of platform messenger services. The corresponding letter was published on the website of the British government.

It is worth noting that almost simultaneously with the publication of the letter, it became known that Washington and London signed an information exchange agreement that would allow the US authorities to request the data necessary to investigate serious crimes, such as terrorism, violence against minors and cybercrime, directly from tech companies based in the UK and vice versa.

A letter from representatives of the security forces of the three countries says that encryption can prevent law enforcement from combating illegal actions on a social network, including “attempts by foreign opponents to undermine democratic values ​​and institutions.”

"Improving security in the virtual world should not make us more vulnerable in the real world ... Companies should not intentionally design their systems in such a way as to exclude any possibility of access to content even to prevent or investigate the most serious crimes," the letter says .

Facebook, according to the BuzzFeed portal, commented on the situation, saying that “it is strongly opposed to attempts by governments (to oblige the company. - RT ) to leave loopholes for access to encrypted correspondence. In turn, Mark Zuckerberg defended his company's plans to provide end-to-end encryption of information in instant messengers. This was reported by Reuters.

  • Facebook social network logo
  • Reuters
  • © Regis Duvignau

At the same time, in July, Mark Zuckerberg stated that “active efforts to introduce more reliable encryption” in Facebook messengers will not cause delight among law enforcement agencies.

“Over time, when we get closer to its implementation, this issue will require an even more delicate approach ... But we believe it is more faithful to actively protect the right of users to privacy, which we will do when the time comes,” BuzzFeed quotes the words of the owner Facebook

“Trying to prove himself an independent company”

However, according to experts, speaking about the willingness to confront the authorities in order to protect the rights of their users, Facebook management forgets that the platform itself has repeatedly violated these rights, blocking “objectionable” groups and pages on its own initiative.

So, in September, Facebook called itself a private publisher, which has the right to publish and block information at its discretion, and not a public forum. This statement was made by the social network in response to a lawsuit by journalist Laura Lumer, whose Facebook account was blocked, calling the girl a “dangerous person” because of her right-wing political views. Lumer accused the company of trying to limit its right to freedom of speech, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

And in October, Facebook once again closed access to a group supporting US President Donald Trump and the American police. More than 170 thousand people signed up for the Police Lives Matter community, which was led from Kosovo. According to researchers from the Popular Information website, non-political posts and photos of animals were laid out in the group. Then, Facebook spokesman Joe Osbourne said the group allegedly “violated the rules against spam and fake accounts.”

At the same time, analysts note that in parallel, the social network "works very closely" with representatives of the special services, which now have "unhindered access" to the data of ordinary users.

“It is important for the American authorities to control social networks, and the speech of Barr and his colleagues against encryption indicates that this control is strengthening,” said Andrei Sidorov, head of the department of international organizations and world political processes at the Moscow State University’s faculty of world politics.

In turn, political analyst Alexander Asafov, in an interview with RT, expressed the opinion that the true causes of claims against Facebook are not related to interference with the investigation of crimes.

“Law enforcement agencies in these countries still have access to the data of ordinary citizens, and no encryption system prevents them from gaining unauthorized access to personal information and correspondence. This proves a lot of facts, including published documents on WikiLeaks. However, the encryption system will create certain difficulties for security officials to conceal the facts of interference in the private life of ordinary citizens, ”said the expert.

  • US Department of Homeland Security
  • AFP
  • © EVA HAMBACH

According to Asafov, if there is no such encryption, law enforcement agencies will “open up a field for large-scale fraud,” which can be presented as evidence, including on the issue of “interference with elections”.

“This is simply the creation of a future argumentative base for demonstrating alleged traces of interference in future elections,” the analyst explained.

Asafov also recalled that Facebook and WhatsApp and Instagram belonging to this company have signed special documents to ensure that Western law enforcement agencies have access to correspondence and user files if they are suspected of a crime.

“The company collaborates with intelligence agencies, because Zuckerberg understands that this is a matter of the survival of his business. He personally and his social networks could have serious problems if he refused them to exchange data and provide access. For all this, Facebook is trying to show itself as an independent company, because otherwise it would be difficult for social networks to get user trust and profit, ”the analyst said.

"Find an external stimulus"

In an open letter, the attorney general and head of the US Department of Homeland Security, as well as the interior ministers of Great Britain and Australia, once again mentioned "the attempts of foreign opponents to undermine democratic values ​​and institutions." Despite the fact that Russia is not mentioned in this context, most likely, by “foreign opponents” the authors had in mind, including the Russian Federation.

Recall that in a report by the United States Department of Homeland Security, Russia is called an “adversary,” which takes advantage of cyber opportunities to undermine infrastructure, democracy, and steal US state secrets.

Several departments joined forces at once to protect against these threats: the IMB, the Pentagon, the Ministry of Commerce, and a number of other state and private organizations.

According to Alexander Asafov, speaking out against encryption, Washington is preparing a tool to generate new allegations of interference in the U.S. election of 2020 via the Internet.

“It is possible that once again Russia will be guilty. After Moscow is again accused of interference, the so-called “evidence” based on unencrypted correspondence will be provided, and the prosecution will be supplemented by a reference to a report made earlier, ”the expert emphasized.

According to Andrei Sidorov, the situation with accusations against the Russian Federation is aggravated by the election campaign in the United States, which is now "extremely harsh".

“Representatives of the Democratic Party are now the easiest way to find an external irritant in the person of Russia and blame Moscow for all sins in order to justify their political mistakes. For the Democrats, the “Russian footprint” is a key provision that they cannot refuse. Because it is important for them to prove the illegitimacy of Trump's rule or to sow doubt in the minds of ordinary Americans. And Russia will continue to figure as the main aggressor, since now the Democratic Party is extremely profitable, ”the analyst said.

Sidorov believes that Barr, being a supporter of Trump, once again touches on the topic of “interference in the elections”, because he fears censure on the part of representatives of the Democratic Party in bias.

  • US President Donald Trump
  • Reuters
  • © Kevin Lamarque

“For Barr, who heads the US Department of Justice, it’s important to save face and demonstrate his impartiality. Otherwise, the congress will have a reason to accuse him of misbalance, of acting in the hands of Trump and of seeking compromising evidence on the Democrats, ”the expert explained.

According to Sidorov, the US Attorney General is not afraid to do this, because he realizes that representatives of the Democratic Party will not be able to unearth any evidence of "Trump’s connection with Russia." The same goes for statements about the Russian “threat” in cyberspace.

“If Washington had real evidence that Moscow attacked the White House in the cyber sphere, the American side would have published this data long ago,” the analyst concluded.