Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > New but not improved
View graph of relations

New but not improved: a critical examination of revisions to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 encryption provisions

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

Standard

New but not improved : a critical examination of revisions to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 encryption provisions. / Chatterjee, Bela Bonita.

In: International Journal of Law and Information Technology, Vol. 19, No. 3, 09.08.2011, p. 264-284.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{35bd403ec0f94d8f827353dcdb44c18f,
title = "New but not improved: a critical examination of revisions to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 encryption provisions",
abstract = "Considering the criminal uses of encryption, it has been asserted that national security and law enforcement endeavours must not be frustrated by potential evidence being hidden through digital encryption while the encryption key is withheld. The facilitation of state access to encryption keys through the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ({\textquoteleft}RIPA 2000{\textquoteright}) was intended to address precisely such a danger. However, since this statute{\textquoteright}s enactment there have been significant shifts in law and policy relating to terrorism and child pornography as well as important technological developments. This article critically examines changes to the RIPA 2000 encryption provisions made by the Terrorism Act 2006 and the Policing and Crime Act 2009. It also considers emerging statistical data and cases including R v S(F) [2008]. It concludes that the underlying premises of the revised provisions are flawed, the provisions themselves ineffectual in practice and in the longer term potentially open to {\textquoteleft}mission creep{\textquoteright} to cover lesser offences.",
keywords = "child pornography, encryption, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, Policing and Crime Act 2009, R v S(F) [2008] EWCA Crim 2177, Terrorism Act 2006, terrorism",
author = "Chatterjee, {Bela Bonita}",
year = "2011",
month = aug
day = "9",
doi = "10.1093/ijlit/ear008",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "264--284",
journal = "International Journal of Law and Information Technology",
issn = "0967-0769",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - New but not improved

T2 - a critical examination of revisions to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 encryption provisions

AU - Chatterjee, Bela Bonita

PY - 2011/8/9

Y1 - 2011/8/9

N2 - Considering the criminal uses of encryption, it has been asserted that national security and law enforcement endeavours must not be frustrated by potential evidence being hidden through digital encryption while the encryption key is withheld. The facilitation of state access to encryption keys through the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (‘RIPA 2000’) was intended to address precisely such a danger. However, since this statute’s enactment there have been significant shifts in law and policy relating to terrorism and child pornography as well as important technological developments. This article critically examines changes to the RIPA 2000 encryption provisions made by the Terrorism Act 2006 and the Policing and Crime Act 2009. It also considers emerging statistical data and cases including R v S(F) [2008]. It concludes that the underlying premises of the revised provisions are flawed, the provisions themselves ineffectual in practice and in the longer term potentially open to ‘mission creep’ to cover lesser offences.

AB - Considering the criminal uses of encryption, it has been asserted that national security and law enforcement endeavours must not be frustrated by potential evidence being hidden through digital encryption while the encryption key is withheld. The facilitation of state access to encryption keys through the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (‘RIPA 2000’) was intended to address precisely such a danger. However, since this statute’s enactment there have been significant shifts in law and policy relating to terrorism and child pornography as well as important technological developments. This article critically examines changes to the RIPA 2000 encryption provisions made by the Terrorism Act 2006 and the Policing and Crime Act 2009. It also considers emerging statistical data and cases including R v S(F) [2008]. It concludes that the underlying premises of the revised provisions are flawed, the provisions themselves ineffectual in practice and in the longer term potentially open to ‘mission creep’ to cover lesser offences.

KW - child pornography

KW - encryption

KW - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

KW - Policing and Crime Act 2009

KW - R v S(F) [2008] EWCA Crim 2177

KW - Terrorism Act 2006

KW - terrorism

U2 - 10.1093/ijlit/ear008

DO - 10.1093/ijlit/ear008

M3 - Journal article

VL - 19

SP - 264

EP - 284

JO - International Journal of Law and Information Technology

JF - International Journal of Law and Information Technology

SN - 0967-0769

IS - 3

ER -