Backdoor battle puts encrypted phone vendors in thorny position
Without secure encryption, the GATCA is just another luxury smartphone
Macate, a manufacturer of secure smartphones, is finding itself caught in the middle of the battle raging between the US government looking to require backdoors on encrypted devices and those opposing that idea.
Macate's use of encryption is in the spotlight as the company exhibits its GATCA Elite luxury cyber phone in Las Vegas at International CES, a massive technology trade show.
The phone includes a host of security features, including AES 512 encryption, that the company said will be all but useless if the US government gets its way and insists that a backdoor be included in its products.
“We are in a very weird position. We spent the last several years figuring out every way possible to protect the phone and the government wants us to leave what amounts to a key under the mat in the back of the house,” said Rudo Boothe, director of software and systems architecture at Macate.
Boothe insisted that any opening left in its system will be discovered by the bad guys and if cyber-criminals are stymied by the GATCA's technology there is no guarantee they won't be able to obtain access through another source, namely, the US government.
“It makes me nervous to give away our secrets to an organisation that gets hacked. If they could guarantee it wouldn't, that would be one thing, but they can't,” Boothe said.
While Boothe accepted the argument about needing to protect Americans from outside threats, he said the nation's various intelligence networks will have to utilise human assets to check on the bad guys instead of relying on technology.
“The feds will have to figure something else out,” he said.
Macate has a long list of supporters that includes most major manufacturers and privacy advocacy groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). Arrayed on the other side are most law enforcement and governmental agencies that believe a backdoor is needed to help fight crime and terrorism.