In the Silk Road Case, Dont Blame the TechnologyParker Higgins The increased attention on this technology is a good reminder about how important it is not to blame these tools for the actions of a small portion of their users. The public wouldnt tolerate a campaign to malign the car because of its utility as a getaway vehicle for bank robbers; we must apply the same critical thinking to essential privacy-preserving technology. In certain parts of the complaint, even the federal agent behind the investigation and the Justice Department attorney in charge of the case acknowledge this. In describing how Tor was required to access the Silk Road (the site was configured as a Tor hidden service), they state that Tor has known legitimate uses. Similarly, Bitcoins are not illegal in and of themselves and have known legitimate uses. Elsewhere the complaint goes astray. For example, it asserts that the suspects efforts to hide the identities of those that run Silk Road reflect his awareness of the illegal nature of the Silk Road enterprise. Of course, that explanation overlooks the countless lawful reasons why a person would want to engage in anonymous speechand in the process hide the identities of those behind the technical infrastructurethat dont involve breaking the law. Its essential that the use of encryption, anonymization techniques, and other privacy practices is not deemed a suspicious activity. Rather, it must be recognized as an essential element for practicing freedom of speech in a digital environment. In some ways, the complaint provides encouragement to those who depend on this technology to engage in speech privately and anonymously. After all, it was human error, and the chance discovery of nine fake ID cards in a routine package inspection at the border, that led to the final round of investigation. This summers revelations about the NSAs subverting certain cryptographic technologies have definitely heightened fears in the security community. Although there are still some unanswered questions about the investigation, its a small relief that, for now, those fears werent confirmed by the criminal complaint. The point remains, however, that relegating these technologies by associating them only with their criminal use threatens to undermine their ability to enable important, lawful speech. Unfortunately, weve witnessed that sort of demonization of technology before. Weve seen it in attempts to target peer-to-peer protocols because they can be used for copyright infringement; in the outrageous stacking of penalties that can result in decades of possible prison time for violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; in the original Crypto Wars of the 1990s and their reprise today; and in many other places besides. The allegations against the Silk Road are serious, and may get even more so as the case progresses to formal charges and a trial. But if the government puts undue weight on the suspects use of technology, instead of the actual crimes of which he is accused, the public will be worse off for it. RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLE: 