Inspired by the Cryptopunk Manifesto and Phillip Rogaway’s analysis of the ethical characteristics of cryptography, this article explores the intersection of cryptographic work and moral responsibility with political activism.
The discussion covered the historical context for the development of cryptography, the philosophical underpinnings of cypherpunk ideology, and contemporary challenges posed by mass surveillance and privacy concerns. By examining these aspects, this article calls for a renewed commitment to developing cryptographic solutions that prioritize human rights and public goods.
introduction
Cryptography has long been a tool for securing communications and protecting privacy. However, its role goes beyond technical implementation and covers important political and moral dimensions. The Cryptopunk Manifesto [7] written by Eric Hughes in 1993 emphasized the inherently political nature of cryptography and advocated its use as a means of ensuring privacy and individual liberty. Similarly, the work of Phillip Rogaway [10] highlights the ethical responsibilities of cryptographers, especially in the context of mass surveillance and social influence.
Fundamentally, cryptography can be seen as an "armed" means for the public to protect themselves. The 1993 declaration and Rogaway's work underscored two key points: distrust of government and the protection of collective data.
This view is echoed in the thinking of David Chaum, who proposed a transaction model that relies on strong encryption to protect privacy. Although more than 40 years have passed since these ideas were first proposed, the dream of protecting society from information abuse remains elusive. As Chaum warns:
“Computerization is taking away the ability of individuals to monitor and control how information about themselves is used. (…) is laying the foundation for an archival society in which computers can be used to make inferences about ordinary consumers based on the data collected in their transactions. Personal lifestyle, habits, whereabouts and relationships” [5].
In reality, we have gone in a different direction. Today, we rely on these materials to simplify and improve our lives. In addition, we are willing to provide this information to make the device "smarter" and better suited to our needs.
On the one hand, this gives us more time to focus on other tasks, such as developing advanced artificial intelligence technology. On the other hand, we have also forgotten the essence of why cryptography is necessary and what the original dream was.
Moving from a privacy-centric perspective to one that embraces data sharing for convenience highlights a significant ethical dilemma. While technological advancements make life easier, they also increase the risk of creating a surveillance society. The cryptopunk ethos of empowering individuals and protecting their privacy seems at odds with today’s practice. To reconcile these differences, cryptographers and privacy advocates must rekindle cryptography’s original vision—not just as a tool for convenience, but as a tool for preserving privacy, autonomy, and protection against uncontrolled means of monitoring.
Another shift in formalization involves the liaison between cryptography and anarchism. As set out in the original Crypto-Anarchist Manifesto, anarchist ideas and the use of cryptography are closely intertwined. In essence, cryptography is seen as a tool to advance anarchist principles. Anarchism, which opposes all forms of authority and calls for the abolition of institutions, finds a natural ally in cryptography.
In some respects, modern cryptographic practices continue to challenge institutional authority. However, there is a paradox here: although cryptography is designed to resist centralized control, its development and implementation are often determined by experts and funded by large technology companies and institutions. This creates a tension between the anarchist ideal of decentralization and the reality of cryptographic innovation driven by powerful entities. In order to truly respect the vision of cryptopunk and anarchism, ways must be found to develop and deploy cryptographic tools that empower individuals while resisting any form of consolidation of power.
There is also an ironic paradox in our community regarding the centralization of knowledge. One of the policies and mottos of the beloved IACR (International Association for Cryptozoological Research) is the spread of knowledge throughout the world. The original and pure idea was great; however, somewhere along the way, the idea turned sour. Consider the purpose of your nonprofit organization. The word "non-profit" is emphasized here.
Yet, at every IACR meeting, the first slide shown is "We have a strong financial position." Interestingly, for an association that wants transparency, it is difficult to find information about its "finances" other than attending meetings. Additionally, every year we see conference registration fees and fund amounts increase, while the original goal of sharing knowledge seems more distant, or just a utopia.
To put it bluntly, we took advantage of the early days of anarchism, famous professors, and the fun days of constructed cryptography to simply build a masked company under the guise of an academic endeavor. This shift away from the fundamental tenets of cryptopunk and anarchist visions demonstrates the need to return to the roots of cryptography’s development – ensuring that it remains a tool to empower individuals and protect privacy from all forms of centralization and control .
In this article, we aim to present a comprehensive social view of cryptography and the entities that have made cryptographic advances possible over the years. We will explore the ethical responsibilities of cryptography, the origins of the social movements cryptography has influenced, and the current trajectory of cryptography. A focus will be on tracing the historical importance of cryptography and how it has shaped various aspects of our society. By examining these elements, we hope to gain a deeper understanding of cryptography's multifaceted role in the modern world.
The historical background and impact of cryptography
Originally, cryptography was defined as a branch of mathematics and computer science focused on developing techniques for encrypting and decrypting communications. Today, however, the scope of cryptography has expanded significantly. While modern cryptography is still rooted in mathematics, it also involves computer science, electrical engineering, physics, and several other disciplines. Therefore, a more comprehensive definition of modern cryptography is: "Cryptography is a multidisciplinary field dedicated to the study of digital security, aiming to provide tools to ensure communication security."
The development of cryptography has been profoundly influenced by its use in wartime communications and its evolution into digital security applications. Some important historical milestones include:
- World War II and the Enigma Machine: The use of cryptography in military communications and its cracking by the Allies highlighted the dual nature of cryptographic work, both as a security tool and as a target for adversaries.
- The emergence of public-key cryptography: The introduction of public-key cryptography in the 1970s revolutionized secure communications and laid the foundation for the practice of modern cryptography.
- Shor's algorithm and prime factorization: developing quantum algorithms capable of breaking modern public-key cryptography deployed around the world.
Cryptography made significant progress during World War II, a period of intense cryptographic and cryptanalysis activity. The success of cryptanalysis during this period highlighted the importance of rigorous analysis and the possibility of vulnerabilities in encryption methods.
As the computer industry evolved and private sector demand for secure hardware and software grew, restrictive regulations on the domestic use and export of encryption technology (originally classified as war devices) became obsolete. Continuous technological advancement requires state-of-the-art security measures [6].
Distrust of data collection and outdated regulations have combined to lead to advocacy for encryption technology, which has become both a market necessity and a form of resistance to growing surveillance systems.
In the mid-1990s, with the development of Shor's algorithm, major scientific breakthroughs were made in the field of cryptography. This quantum algorithm efficiently solves problems such as integer factorization and discrete logarithms, which form the basis of many classical cryptosystems such as RSA and ECC.
The emergence of Shor's algorithm stimulated the development of post-quantum cryptography, whose goal is to construct cryptographic algorithms that can resist quantum attacks. This has become an important area of research because potential future implementations of quantum computers could undermine the security of current cryptographic systems. Ensuring the transition to quantum-resistant encryption methods is critical to maintaining the integrity and security of digital communications in the post-quantum era.
Standardization bodies such as NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) and ISO (International Organization for Standardization) play a vital role in the development and adoption of cryptography standards, ensuring interoperability and interoperability between different systems and applications. Security. These standards provide guidelines for the secure implementation of cryptographic algorithms and protocols, which are critical to protecting sensitive information in various fields.
Cryptography is now the foundation of modern technologies such as blockchain, digital currencies, secure chat applications, and the Internet of Things (IoT). For example, blockchain technology relies on cryptographic hashes and digital signatures to ensure the integrity and authenticity of transactions. Likewise, end-to-end encryption in chat apps like Signal and WhatsApp ensures that only the intended recipient can read the message.
The field must also continue to evolve to deal with a variety of cryptographic attacks, including side-channel attacks, brute-force enumeration attacks, and sophisticated cryptanalysis techniques. Researchers are also constantly developing new defense techniques and cryptographic primitives to enhance the security of digital systems and protect against these evolving threats.
Looking ahead, emerging trends in cryptography research include advances in homomorphic encryption, which allows computations on encrypted material without decrypting it; and zero-knowledge proofs, which can verify a statement without revealing anything other than that the statement is true. Information; Quantum key distribution, using the principles of quantum mechanics to securely distribute cryptographic keys.
The Cryptopunk Manifesto: A Political Manifesto
In the book "Cryptopunk: Privacy and Security in the Digital Age"[3], Anderson addresses several questions about the ethics and manifesto of the cryptopunk movement from a new philosophical perspective. This book is relatively new and takes a modern approach to the ethics of the cryptopunk movement.
“However, cryptopunk philosophy is not just about the politics of security and privacy. At its core, the cryptopunk worldview is fundamentally normative, meaning it is founded on ideas about what people and institutions should do and society should be. What kind of proposition is it?”[3]
This quote allows us to connect it to the anarchist movement and even deduce that the cryptopunk philosophy could be considered a digital iteration of anarchism. An analogy can be drawn with Bakunin's early work, which echoes similar assertions of social norms:
"We firmly believe that freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, and socialism without freedom is slavery and barbarism."[4]
Both passages emphasize fundamental beliefs about how society should be structured and the importance of balancing liberty and justice. Anderson's cryptopunk philosophy emphasizes digital privacy and security, while Bakunin's anarchism emphasizes the need for social freedom and equality. Together they reflect a shared vision of normative principles that guide social ideals. This raises a natural question for the cryptopunk movement: “Is this the guide to a digital society?”
As mentioned earlier, we must recognize that the distinction between the “real” world and the “digital” world is becoming increasingly blurred. Therefore, another related question is: "Should we update our view of cryptographic constructs to reflect this unified reality?"
The Cryptopunk Manifesto believes that cryptography is a fundamental tool for protecting privacy and promoting personal freedom in the digital age. The main principles of the declaration include:
- Privacy as a Fundamental Right: Claims that privacy is essential to a free society and that individuals must have the means to protect their personal information. This right to privacy is regarded as the cornerstone of other civil liberties, emphasizing that without privacy, other freedoms will be seriously compromised.
- Decentralization and individual empowerment: Emphasizes the importance of decentralized systems and empowering individuals through strong cryptography. Decentralization is essential to prevent abuse of power by centralized entities, resulting in a more resilient and fair digital ecosystem.
- Activism and practical applications: Encourage activists to develop and deploy cryptographic tools to combat government and corporate surveillance. This activism is rooted in the belief that practical technological solutions are necessary to preserve freedoms in the digital age, where legislative measures alone may not be enough.
In a modern world where digital and physical realities are intertwined, the principles of the Cryptopunk Manifesto are more important than ever. Cryptozoology is not just a tool for protecting information, but an essential element in ensuring individual sovereignty and resisting oppressive structures.
As technology continues to evolve, the Manifesto’s calls for privacy, decentralization, and activism provide a critical framework for building a fair and just digital society.
Ethical Responsibilities of Cryptozoologists
In his paper "The Ethical Characteristics of Cryptographical Work" [10] Phillip Rogaway argued that cryptographic research is not value-neutral and that cryptographers have a moral responsibility to consider the social and political implications of their work. He made several key points:
- Ethical Responsibilities: Cryptozoologists should be aware of their ethical responsibilities and the impact their work has on society.
- Historical Background: The development of cryptography has been closely associated with government and military interests, particularly in surveillance and intelligence gathering.
- Surveillance and control: Modern cryptographic work often indirectly supports surveillance and control systems, which may conflict with values of privacy and civil liberties.
- Public Goods: Cryptozoologists should strive to contribute to public goods, developing technologies that protect individual privacy and resist authoritarianism.
- Political Engagement: Rogaway encourages cryptographers to engage in politics and consider the broader social implications of their research.
Rogaway advocates a formal shift in cryptography, advocating for researchers to take a more socially conscious approach. This requires not only focusing on the technical aspects, but also actively engaging in discussions about the ethical and political dimensions of their work.
Despite the influence of Rogaway's article, little has changed about the ethical challenges in cryptography scholarship. These include the International Association for Cryptozoological Research (IACR), which still lacks formal ethical guidelines.
Cryptozoology is multidisciplinary in nature – but whether it is rooted in mathematics, computer science or engineering, it raises questions about its ethical foundations. Karst and Slegers [8] emphasized the diverse convergence of ethics among the various sectors that provide cryptography education, emphasizing the need for shared ethical standards.
In contrast, some sectors exhibit a clearer ethical framework than others. For example, the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) maintains a detailed code of ethics and professional conduct, including guidelines on honesty, privacy, and social contribution [1]. The American Mathematical Society (AMS) and the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) provide more general guidance on ethical behavior [2,9]. In fact, we can say that professional codes only briefly (and very vaguely) touch on issues related to ethics:
"MAA requires directors, officers, members, persons compensated by MAA and those who contribute their time, and all employees to adhere to high standards of business and personal ethics in the performance of their duties and responsibilities."[9]
“When mathematical work may affect public health, safety, or public welfare, mathematicians have a responsibility to disclose the effects of their work to their employer and the public, as necessary.”[2]
Notably, the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) lacks a formal code of ethics. Another important cryptography organization, the IACR, although focused on cryptography, also lacks a comprehensive ethics statement. This gap is striking given cryptography’s deep intersection with political and social issues.
Philosophical discussion of ethics and morals
It is difficult to define what ethics is due to its philosophical nature and different interpretations in the literature. Ethics deals with issues such as morals, values, right and wrong behavior, and the principles that guide individual or collective behavior. It studies what constitutes good and bad behavior, how individuals should act in various situations, and the reasons behind moral judgments[11].
As a community rooted in mathematics and computer science, the cryptography community values precision of definitions and rigorous reasoning. However, moral reasoning provides a route to a more formal definition. It involves constructing arguments supported by sound arguments and conclusions, aiming for accuracy and logical coherence.
“Our moral thinking should have two mutually reinforcing goals: to do the right thing and to be able to support our views with perfect reasoning. We want the truth, both in the initial hypotheses we pose about a problem and in the conclusions we ultimately draw. But We also want to make sure that our opinions are supported by good reasons. This provides two criteria for good moral reasoning: first, we must avoid false beliefs, and second, our moral thinking must be logically sound and error-free. ”[11, Chapter 1, Page 10]
Debates about the ethics of working in cryptography revolve around the balance between advancing technical capabilities and addressing the ethical consequences of such advancements. Cryptozoologists must navigate complex ethical terrain as their work both protects personal privacy and enables surveillance. The ethical character of cryptographic work requires a reflexive approach that considers how cryptographic tools and technologies impact social norms and values.
This debate is not just academic but has real-world implications, influencing policy decisions and shaping the future of privacy and security in the digital age. Addressing these ethical questions requires an ongoing dialogue between technologists, ethicists, policymakers, and the public to ensure that advances in cryptography are consistent with broader societal interests.
In other words, the field's lack of codes of conduct and ethics could harm its future growth, especially as it attracts more scientists from diverse backgrounds and ages. We cannot assume that everyone will inherently adhere to the ethics of the field. However, establishing a clear code of ethics can ensure that academic societies' pronouncements are more accurate and consistent, aligning their charters with broader principles of scientific integrity and ethics.
Cryptozoology, anarchy and the future
As mentioned in Section 3, the cryptopunk manifesto and anarchism show significant similarities. The relationship between cryptography and anarchism is rooted in their shared emphasis on privacy, personal freedom, and resistance to centralized control. Key intersections include:
- Privacy and personal autonomy: Anarchists advocate personal autonomy and personal privacy and oppose any form of control or surveillance by the state or other centralized authority. Cryptographic technologies enable individuals to maintain their privacy and autonomy in the digital age.
- Resist centralized control: Anarchism opposes centralized control and hierarchical structures and advocates decentralization and voluntary association. Cryptography supports decentralized systems by enabling secure peer-to-peer communications and transactions without relying on a centralized authority.
- Empower individuals: Anarchists aim to empower individuals by dismantling oppressive systems and enabling self-government and mutual aid. Cryptographic tools enable individuals to protect their data and communications, giving them control over their digital existence and interactions.
- Anonymity and pseudonymity: Anonymity can be a strategy for anarchists to protect themselves from state repression and organize without fear of reprisal. Cryptotechnologies such as Tor and anonymous cryptocurrencies provide anonymity and pseudonymity, allowing individuals to operate without revealing their identity.
- Philosophical Foundations: The philosophical foundations of anarchism include a firm belief in individual freedom, non-coercion and suspicion of authority. The cryptopunk movement advocates the use of cryptography to achieve privacy and security and shares similar philosophical values.
- Historical Background: Throughout history, anarchists have often used secret communication methods to avoid detection and suppression. Modern cryptography developed in part out of a desire to protect individuals and groups from authoritarian regimes.
From these critical points, it is clear that cryptography is a key tool for achieving various anarchist goals. Cryptographic methods are tailored to meet specific needs within an anarchist framework, such as ensuring secure communication channels, protecting activists’ identities, and facilitating decentralized collaboration. By enabling private and secure interactions, cryptography can help anarchists resist surveillance and maintain operational security.
This technological empowerment enables the practical application of anarchist principles, creating an environment where decentralized and voluntary associations can flourish without external interference.
In recent years, however, the values that once underpinned the development of cryptocurrencies appear to have been overshadowed by a focus on economic gain. The rise of cryptocurrencies, while initially aligned with ideals of decentralization and financial autonomy, has become increasingly dominated by speculative interests and profit motives.
This shift toward monetization threatens to undermine cryptography’s ethical foundations and divert attention from its potential to protect privacy and empower individuals. The community must remember the original values articulated by cryptopunk and strive to balance innovation with ethical considerations to ensure that the pursuit of profit does not overshadow a commitment to privacy and individual freedom.
Cryptography has undergone significant changes since the introduction of the Diffie-Hellman key exchange protocol. Initially, cryptography was a highly academic and scientific field focused on theoretical advancement and intellectual pursuits. Over time, however, it has developed into a commercial field, with companies utilizing cryptographic technology to develop and sell products.
This commercialization has shifted the focus from academic exploration to market-driven solutions, often prioritizing profit over the ethical and scientific values that originally guided the field. It is critical for the cryptography community to return to its academic roots and reaffirm its commitment to scientific rigor and ethical responsibility. We need to refocus on several key academic aspects of cryptography.
While standardized processes and security implementations are important, should they consume all of our attention? Shouldn’t there be a future in exploring new attacks and developing alternative cryptographic schemes?
The intersection of cryptography and anarchism reveals their deep alignment in core values such as privacy, individual freedom, and resistance to centralized control. By exploring these connections in detail, we can better understand the role of cryptography in advancing these principles and addressing the ethical challenges that arise.
Ongoing dialogue and collaboration among technologists, ethicists, and activists is critical to ensuring that cryptographic advances help build a freer and more just society.
Another key point is the growing distance between the academic focus of our field and the concept of “non-profit.” Shouldn’t our first goal be the advancement of knowledge? When did we lose focus and let big tech dominate our meetings?
For example, how can a student without a lot of funds afford to attend a conference in a city like Zurich, where the registration fee is around 450 euros, plus hotel and travel costs? While subsidies provide part of the solution, wouldn't it be better to choose cheaper locations that allow for wider participation?
When did we become so elitist that we can't host conferences in less well-known but more economical cities? This shift to high-cost venues limits accessibility and inclusivity, which is contrary to fundamental values of scholarship and scientific inquiry.
References:
1.ACM. Acm code of ethics and professional conduct.
2.American Mathematical Society (AMS). Ethical guidelines of the american mathematical society. http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics, 2024. [Online; accessed 10May-2024 ].
3.Patrick D Anderson. Cypherpunk ethics: Radical ethics for the digital age. Routledge, 2022.
4. Mikhail Bakunin. Federalism, socialism, anti-theologism. Bakunin on Anarchy: Selected Works by the Activist-Founder of World Anarchism, pages 102–147, 1867.
5. David Chaum. Security without identification: Transaction systems to make big brother obsolete.
Communications of the ACM, 28(10):1030–1044, 1985.
6. Whitfield Diffie and Susan Landau. Privacy on the Line: The Politics of Wiretapping and Encryption. MIT Press, 2001.
7. Eric Hughes. A cypherpunk's manifesto, 1993.
8.Nathaniel Karst and Rosa Slegers. Cryptography in context: co-teaching ethics and mathematics. PRIMUS, 29(9):1039–1059, 2019.
9. Mathematical Association of America (MAA). Welcoming environment, code of ethics, and whistleblower policy. http://www.maa.org/about-maa/policies-and-procedures/welcoming-environment-codeof-ethics-and -whistleblower-policy, 2024. [Online; accessed 10-May-2024].
10.Phillip Rogaway. The moral character of cryptographic work, 2015.
11.Russ Shafer-Landau. The fundamentals of ethics. Oxford University Press, 4 edition, 2018.
