Much of CFA’s work on privacy focuses on corporate surveillance – companies collecting and using our personal information, often without our knowledge or consent. But government surveillance is also a major concern (in fact, the two issues are intertwined, since in many cases the government is obtaining information about our activities from our telephone companies, Internet service providers, airlines, and other companies that collect that data).

One handy tool to protect ourselves from prying eyes is encryption, which turns information into code that can only be read by the intended recipient who has the key to the code. It’s commonly used when we make purchases on websites to protect the financial account information that we’re providing as it is transmitted – you’ll notice that the “http” in the address bar turns into “https” to show that encryption is being used. Google encrypts your searches to keep information about what looking for from snoopers (though your searches aren’t entirely private, since Google collects and uses that information). Google also encrypts Gmail, its email program, and there are other services that you can use to send encrypted messages. Increasingly, companies are encrypting account numbers and other sensitive personal information that they store to protect the data from hackers and others who have no business seeing it.

Lately there has been a lot of hand-wringing about encryption. In the wake of terrorist attacks, security agencies complain that encryption makes it harder for them to get the intelligence they need. Some people argue that encryption should be banned, others that government agencies should at least have the keys to break the codes if they decide it’s necessary. For people living under repressive governments in various parts of the world, the inability to communicate in private can put them in great peril. Even in “free” countries, however, communicating with others without fear of being spied on is an important right that must be defended. Laws and due process help to ensure that there is a reasonable balance between government intrusion and liberty. Our rights should be respected, not side-stepped.

That’s why CFA joined other organizations, companies and individuals in an open letter to government leaders around the world calling on them to protect the privacy of their citizens through secure communications technology and reject demands to ban or restrict the use of encryption. For more information about this initiative go to https://securetheinternet.org/.

CFA also signed onto a letter about a more tangible example of prying eyes, the “whole body scanners” that are used at airport security checkpoints. Individuals who for health, religious, or other personal reasons do not want to submit to these “electronic strip searches” are supposed to be able to opt-out in favor of getting a thorough pat-down. But the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) has never issued a final rule setting out its authority to conduct airport screening, despite a court order to do so, and is now claiming that it can deny travelers the option not to go through the scanners. The letter urges the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to hold a hearing on this matter.

We all want to be safe, but not at the expense of our freedom from unnecessary government intrusion.