The debate over backdoors in encryption systems, such as VPNs, raises ethical dilemmas and profound legal questions:
Should we weaken everyone's security to catch a few?
Who controls that backdoor?
And what happens if it falls into the wrong hands?
Arguments in Favor of Backdoors
Backdoors are necessary for
national security and justice.
Some users do abuse encrypted communications to hide illegal activities such as terrorism, drug trafficking, or child exploitation. Faced with this, governments and law enforcement agencies face the phenomenon of "warrant-proof encryption," where even a legal warrant does not grant access to crucial messages [citation]. This creates a kind of digital "lawless space" that malicious actors can freely exploit.
Access should only be granted under legal regulation.
It is proposed that this access to private communications be granted only under specific circumstances, such as with judicial authorization. This would attempt to balance surveillance with respect for individual rights.
From an ethical perspective, it is argued that protecting society at large could justify, in certain cases, restricted access to encrypted communications if done with appropriate oversight.
Arguments Against Backdoors
A vulnerability not just for criminals, but for everyone
Including a backdoor in encrypted technologies weakens overall security. It doesn't matter if the initial intention is good; any vulnerability becomes an attractive target for hackers, authoritarian governments, or even malicious insiders. Like a house with a secret door: if someone else finds it, they can get in without a problem.
Real-World Examples of Abuse
In the case of the Athens Affair spying scandal (2004), a backdoor was installed in Greece's telecommunications system for "national security" purposes, but it ended up being used to spy on senior officials and citizens without judicial authorization. This operation was discovered by accident and left serious consequences, including the suspicious death of an engineer linked to the system.
It's Impossible to Control Who Has Access
Even if access to a backdoor is provided through legal controls, there is no guarantee that this tool won't be leaked, stolen, or misused. Once created, that vulnerability is there forever, and can be replicated by any actor with sufficient technical capability.
So now what?
From an ethical perspective, the central problem is that sacrificing collective security to combat individual crime can be more harmful than beneficial. Backdoors don't distinguish between "good" and "bad": they open the way for mass surveillance, abuse of power, and a loss of trust in technology.
Legally, this also poses challenges:
-
Who authorizes access?
-
What happens if another country or company gains access illegally?
-
How are global citizens who use these services protected?