fbi | Over the past year, I have confirmed what I long believed—that the
FBI is filled with amazing people, doing an amazing array of things
around the world, and doing them well. I have also confirmed what I have
long known: that a commitment to the rule of law and civil liberties is
at the core of the FBI. It is the organization’s spine.
But we confront serious threats—threats that are changing every day.
So I want to make sure I have every lawful tool available to keep you
safe from those threats.
An Opportunity to Begin a National Conversation
I wanted to meet with you to talk in a serious way about the impact
of emerging technology on public safety. And within that context, I
think it’s important to talk about the work we do in the FBI, and what
we need to do the job you have entrusted us to do.
There are a lot of misconceptions in the public eye about what we in
the government collect and the capabilities we have for collecting
information.
My job is to explain and clarify where I can with regard to the work
of the FBI. But at the same time, I want to get a better handle on your
thoughts, because those of us in law enforcement can’t do what we need
to do without your trust and your support. We have no monopoly on
wisdom.
My goal today isn’t to tell people what to do. My goal is to urge our
fellow citizens to participate in a conversation as a country about
where we are, and where we want to be, with respect to the authority of
law enforcement.
The Challenge of Going Dark
Technology has forever changed the world we live in. We’re online, in
one way or another, all day long. Our phones and computers have become
reflections of our personalities, our interests, and our identities.
They hold much that is important to us.
And with that comes a desire to protect our privacy and our data—you
want to share your lives with the people you choose. I sure do. But the
FBI has a sworn duty to keep every American safe from crime and
terrorism, and technology has become the tool of choice for some very
dangerous people.
Unfortunately, the law hasn’t kept pace with technology, and this
disconnect has created a significant public safety problem. We call it
“Going Dark,” and what it means is this: Those charged with protecting
our people aren’t always able to access the evidence we need to
prosecute crime and prevent terrorism even with lawful authority. We
have the legal authority to intercept and access communications and
information pursuant to court order, but we often lack the technical
ability to do so.
We face two overlapping challenges. The first concerns real-time
court-ordered interception of what we call “data in motion,” such as
phone calls, e-mail, and live chat sessions. The second challenge
concerns court-ordered access to data stored on our devices, such as
e-mail, text messages, photos, and videos—or what we call “data at
rest.” And both real-time communication and stored data are increasingly
encrypted.
Let’s talk about court-ordered interception first, and then we’ll talk about challenges posed by different means of encryption.
In the past, conducting electronic surveillance was more
straightforward. We identified a target phone being used by a bad guy,
with a single carrier. We obtained a court order for a wiretap, and,
under the supervision of a judge, we collected the evidence we needed
for prosecution.
Today, there are countless providers, countless networks, and
countless means of communicating. We have laptops, smartphones, and
tablets. We take them to work and to school, from the soccer field to
Starbucks, over many networks, using any number of apps. And so do those
conspiring to harm us. They use the same devices, the same networks,
and the same apps to make plans, to target victims, and to cover up what
they’re doing. And that makes it tough for us to keep up.
If a suspected criminal is in his car, and he switches from cellular
coverage to Wi-Fi, we may be out of luck. If he switches from one app to
another, or from cellular voice service to a voice or messaging app, we
may lose him. We may not have the capability to quickly switch lawful
surveillance between devices, methods, and networks. The bad guys know
this; they’re taking advantage of it every day.
In the wake of the Snowden disclosures, the prevailing view is that
the government is sweeping up all of our communications. That is not
true. And unfortunately, the idea that the government has access to all
communications at all times has extended—unfairly—to the investigations
of law enforcement agencies that obtain individual warrants, approved by
judges, to intercept the communications of suspected criminals.
