Cryptography at the Crossroads: Ethical Responsibility, the

Cypherpunk Movement and Institutions

Eric Blair

Anonymous
[email protected]

Abstract. This paper explores the intersection of cryptographic work with ethical respon-
sibility and political activism, inspired by the Cypherpunk Manifesto and Phillip Rogaway’s
analysis of the moral character of cryptography. The discussion encompasses the historical
context of cryptographic development, the philosophical underpinnings of the cypherpunk
ideology, and contemporary challenges posed by mass surveillance and privacy concerns. By
examining these facets, the paper calls for a renewed commitment to developing cryptographic
solutions that prioritize human rights and societal good.

1 Introduction

Cryptography has long been a tool for securing communications and protecting privacy. However,
its role extends beyond technical implementations to encompass significant political and ethical
dimensions. The Cypherpunk Manifesto [7], penned by Eric Hughes in 1993, highlights the inher-
ently political nature of cryptography and advocates for its use as a means of ensuring privacy and
individual freedoms. Similarly, Phillip Rogaway’s [10] work underscores the ethical responsibilities
of cryptographers, particularly in the context of mass surveillance and societal impacts.
Fundamentally, cryptography can be seen as a means of “arming” the masses to protect them-
selves. The 1993 manifesto and Rogaway’s work emphasize two key points: distrust of government
and the protection of collective data. This perspective is echoed in the ideas of David Chaum,
who proposed a transaction model relying on strong encryption to preserve privacy. Despite over
40 years passing since these ideas were first articulated, the dream of protecting society from the
misuse of information remains distant. As Chaum warned:

“[C]omputerization is robbing individuals of the ability to monitor and control the ways
information about them is used. (...) The foundation is being laid for a dossier society,
in which computers could be used to infer individuals’ lifestyles, habits, whereabouts, and
associations from data collected in ordinary consumer transactions” [5].

In reality, we have moved in a different direction. Today, we rely on such data to simplify
and enhance our lives. Moreover, we willingly provide this data to make devices “smarter” and
more tailored to our needs. On one hand, this gives us more time to focus on other tasks, such
as developing advanced AI techniques. On the other hand, we have forgotten the essence of why
cryptography is necessary and what the original dream was.
∗
Date of this document: 2024-06-16.
sha1sum: c7220050d72e8e6d4bcc9de832a11bc3f2186b59
This document continue to be updated as we get more understand and views about the subject.
2 Eric Blair

The shift from a privacy-centric view to one that embraces data sharing for convenience high-
lights a significant ethical dilemma. While technological advancements have made life easier, they
have also increased the risk of creating a surveillance society. The cypherpunk ethos, which aimed
to empower individuals and protect their privacy, seems at odds with contemporary practices. To
reconcile these differences, it is crucial for cryptographers and privacy advocates to reignite the orig-
inal vision of cryptography—not just as a tool for convenience, but as a means to uphold privacy,
autonomy, and resistance to unchecked surveillance.
Another shift in paradigms involves the connection between cryptography and anarchism. As
articulated in the original crypto-anarchist manifesto, the ideas of anarchism and the use of cryptog-
raphy were tightly intertwined. In essence, cryptography was seen as a tool for advancing anarchist
principles. Anarchism, with its stance against all forms of authority and its call for the abolition of
institutions, found a natural ally in cryptographic techniques.
In some ways, modern cryptographic practices continue to challenge institutional authority.
However, there is a paradox: while cryptography aims to resist centralized control, its development
and implementation are often dictated by experts and funded by major tech corporations and
institutions. This creates a tension between the anarchist ideals of decentralization and the reality
of cryptographic innovation being driven by powerful entities. To truly honor the cypherpunk and
anarchist visions, it is essential to find ways to develop and deploy cryptographic tools that empower
individuals while resisting the consolidation of power in any form.
There is also an ironic paradox in our community concerning the centralization of knowledge.
One of the policies and mottos of the beloved IACR was to spread knowledge worldwide. The
original and pure idea was great; however, somewhere along the path, this idea got corrupted.
Consider the purpose of a non-profit organization. The term “non-profit” is clear. Yet, at every
IACR meeting, one of the first slides presented is, “we have a robust financial position.” Funnyly
enough, for an association that wants transparency, it is very hard to find data about the “financial”
besides attentind to the meetings. Furthermore, each year, we see the conference fees and the amount
of money in our funds increase, while the original goal of sharing knowledge seems more distant, or
just a utopia.
To cut to the chase, we have used the early days of anarchism, professors, and the fun times
of building cryptography to simply construct a masked corporation under the guise of academic
endeavors. This shift away from the foundational principles of both cypherpunk and anarchist visions
demonstrates a need to return to the roots of cryptographic development—ensuring that it remains
a tool for empowering individuals and safeguarding privacy against all forms of centralization and
control.
In this work, we aim to present a comprehensive social view of cryptography and the entities
that have made cryptographic advancements possible over the years. We will explore the ethical
responsibilities, the origins of social movements that cryptography has influenced, and the current
trajectory of cryptographic development. A key focus will be tracing the historical importance of
cryptography and how it has shaped various aspects of our society. By examining these elements,
we hope to provide a deeper understanding of the multifaceted role of cryptography in the modern
world.

2 Historical context of Cryptography and its Implications

Originally, cryptography was defined as a branch of mathematics and computer science focused on
developing techniques to encrypt and decrypt communications. Today, however, the scope of cryp-
 2. HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF CRYPTOGRAPHY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS 3

tography has expanded significantly. While it still has its roots in mathematics, modern cryptog-
raphy encompasses computer science, electrical engineering, physics, and several other disciplines.
Therefore, a more comprehensive definition of modern cryptography is: “Cryptography is a multi-
disciplinary field dedicated to the study of digital security, aiming to provide tools that ensure the
security of communications.”
The development of cryptography has been profoundly influenced by its use in wartime commu-
nications and its evolution into digital security applications. Some key historical milestones include:

– World War II and the Enigma Machine: The use of cryptography for military commu-
nication and its decryption by the Allies highlighted the dual nature of cryptographic work as
both a tool for security and a target for adversaries.
– The Advent of Public Key Cryptography: The introduction of public key cryptosystems
in the 1970s revolutionized secure communications, laying the groundwork for modern crypto-
graphic practices.
– Shor’s Algorithm and Factoring Primes: The development of a quantum algorithm capable
of breaking modern public key cryptography deployed worldwide.

Cryptography made significant advancements during World War II, a period marked by intense
cryptographic and cryptanalytic activities. The successes in cryptanalysis during this time under-
scored the importance of rigorous analysis and the potential vulnerabilities in encryption methods.
As the computer industry expanded and the demand for secure hardware and software in the
private sector grew, restrictive administrative regulations on the domestic use and export of encryp-
tion—initially classified as a war munition—became outdated. Ongoing technological advancements
required state-of-the-art security measures [6]. This combination of distrust in data collection and
outdated regulations led to the advocacy for encrypted technologies, which became both a market
necessity and a form of resistance against increasing surveillance ecosystems.
A significant scientific breakthrough in cryptography came with the development of Shor’s algo-
rithm in the mid-1990s. This quantum algorithm efficiently solves problems such as integer factor-
ization and discrete logarithms, which form the basis of many classical cryptographic systems like
RSA and ECC. The advent of Shor’s algorithm has spurred the development of post-quantum cryp-
tography, which aims to create cryptographic algorithms that are secure against quantum attacks.
This has become a crucial area of research, as the potential future realization of quantum comput-
ers threatens to undermine the security of current cryptographic systems. Ensuring the transition
to quantum-resistant cryptographic methods is vital for maintaining the integrity and security of
digital communications in the post-quantum era.
Standardization bodies such as NIST and ISO have played a crucial role in the development
and adoption of cryptographic standards, ensuring interoperability and security across different
systems and applications. These standards provide guidelines for implementing secure cryptographic
algorithms and protocols, which are essential for protecting sensitive information in various domains.
Cryptography now underpins modern technologies such as blockchain, digital currencies, secure
messaging applications, and the Internet of Things (IoT). Blockchain technology, for instance, relies
on cryptographic hashing and digital signatures to ensure the integrity and authenticity of transac-
tions. Similarly, end-to-end encryption in messaging apps like Signal and WhatsApp ensures that
only the intended recipients can read the messages.
The field has also had to evolve to counter various cryptographic attacks, including side-channel
attacks, brute force attacks, and sophisticated cryptanalysis techniques. Researchers continually
4 Eric Blair

develop new defenses and cryptographic primitives to enhance the security of digital systems and
protect against these evolving threats.
Looking to the future, emerging trends in cryptographic research include advancements in ho-
momorphic encryption, which allows computations on encrypted data without decrypting it; zero-
knowledge proofs, which enable the verification of a statement without revealing any information
beyond its truth; and quantum key distribution, which uses the principles of quantum mechanics
to securely distribute cryptographic keys.

3 The Cypherpunk Manifesto: A Political Declaration

In the book, Cypherpunk: Privacy and Security in the Digital Age [3], Anderson addresses several
issues concerning the ethics and manifesto of the cypherpunk movement from an updated philo-
sophical perspective since the book is relative new and it has a modern approach about cypherpunk
moviment and ethics.

“Yet, cypherpunk philosophy is about more than the politics of security and privacy. At
its roots, the cypherpunk worldview is fundamentally normative, which means it is built
upon claims about what people and institutions ought to do and what societies ought to be
like.” [3]

This citation allows us to draw a correlation with the anarchist movement and even infer that
cypherpunk philosophy can be viewed as a digital iteration of anarchism. A parallel can be made
with an earlier work by Bakunin, which echoes similar normative claims about society:

“We are convinced that freedom without Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that So-
cialism without freedom is slavery and brutality.” [4]

Both quotes highlight a fundamental belief in how societies should be structured and the im-
portance of balancing freedom and justice. While Anderson’s cypherpunk philosophy emphasizes
digital privacy and security, Bakunin’s anarchism underscores the need for societal freedom and
equality. Together, they reflect a shared vision of normative principles guiding societal ideals. This
raises a natural question for the cypherpunk movement: “Is this the guide for digital society?”
As previously mentioned, we must recognize that the distinction between the “real” world and the
“digital” world is becoming increasingly blurred. Therefore, another pertinent question is: “Should
we update our views on cryptographic constructions to reflect this unified reality?”
The Cypherpunk Manifesto posits that cryptography is a fundamental tool for protecting privacy
and fostering individual freedoms in the digital age. Key tenets of the manifesto include:

– Privacy as a Fundamental Right: Asserting that privacy is essential for a free society
and that individuals must have the means to protect their personal information. This right to
privacy is seen as a cornerstone for other civil liberties, emphasizing that without privacy, other
freedoms are significantly undermined.
– Decentralization and Individual Empowerment: Emphasizing the importance of decen-
tralized systems and empowering individuals through the use of strong cryptography. Decen-
tralization is crucial to preventing abuses of power by centralized authorities, thereby fostering
a more resilient and equitable digital ecosystem.
 4. ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF CRYPTOGRAPHERS 5

– Activism and Practical Application: Encouraging the development and deployment of

cryptographic tools by activists to counteract government and corporate surveillance. This
activism is rooted in the belief that practical, technological solutions are necessary to preserve
freedom in the digital age, where legislative measures alone may fall short.
In the modern world, where digital and physical realities are intertwined, the principles of the
Cypherpunk Manifesto are more relevant than ever. Cryptography is not just a tool for securing
information but a foundational element for ensuring personal autonomy and resisting oppressive
structures. As technology continues to evolve, the manifesto’s call for privacy, decentralization, and
proactive activism provides a crucial framework for building a fair and just digital society.

4 Ethical Responsibilities of Cryptographers

In his paper, The Moral Character of Cryptographic Work [10], Phillip Rogaway argues that crypto-
graphic research is not value-neutral and that cryptographers have a moral responsibility to consider
the social and political implications of their work. He makes several key points:
– Ethical Responsibility: Cryptographers should recognize their ethical responsibility and the
impact their work can have on society.
– Historical Context: The development of cryptography has been deeply intertwined with gov-
ernmental and military interests, particularly in surveillance and intelligence gathering.
– Surveillance and Control: Modern cryptographic work often indirectly supports systems of
surveillance and control, which can conflict with the values of privacy and civil liberties.
– Public Good: Cryptographers should aim to contribute to the public good, developing tech-
nologies that protect individuals’ privacy and resist authoritarianism.
– Political Engagement: Rogaway encourages cryptographers to be politically engaged and to
consider the broader societal implications of their research.
Rogaway advocates for a paradigm shift in cryptography, urging researchers to adopt a more
socially conscious approach. This entails not only focusing on technical aspects but also actively
engaging in discussions about the ethical and political dimensions of their work.
Despite Rogaway’s influential publication, little has changed regarding ethical challenges in aca-
demic cryptography. This includes the International Association for Cryptologic Research (IACR),
which remains deficient in formal ethical guidelines.
Cryptography is inherently multidisciplinary, prompting questions about its ethical founda-
tions—whether rooted in mathematics, computer science, or engineering. Karst and Slegers [8]
highlight the varied integration of ethics across departments offering cryptography education, un-
derscoring the need for cohesive ethical standards.
Comparatively, some departments exhibit more explicit ethical frameworks than others. For
instance, the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) upholds detailed codes of ethics and
professional conduct, including directives on honesty, privacy, and societal contribution [1]. In con-
trast, the American Mathematical Society (AMS) and Mathematical Association of America (MAA)
provide more generalized guidance on ethical conduct [2,9]. In fact, we can say that the professional
codes only briefly (and very vaguely) touch on issues related to ethics:
“The MAA requires Directors, Officers, Members, those compensated by the MAA and those
donating their time, and all employees to observe high standards of business and personal
ethics in the conduct of their duties and responsibilities.” [9]
6 Eric Blair

“When mathematical work may affect the public health, safety or general welfare, it is the
responsibility of mathematicians to disclose the implications of their work to their employers
and to the public, if necessary.” [2]

Notably, the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) lacks a formal code of
ethics. Another important institution for cryptography, the IACR, despite its focus on cryptogra-
phy, similarly lacks a comprehensive ethical statement1 . This gap is striking given the profound
intersection of cryptography with political and societal issues.

Philosophical Discussion on Ethics

Defining ethics is a challenging task due to its philosophical nature and varied interpretations in
literature. Ethics deals with questions about morality, values, right and wrong behavior, and princi-
ples guiding individual or collective conduct. It examines what constitutes good and bad behavior,
how individuals should act in various situations, and the reasons behind moral judgments [11].
As a community rooted in mathematics and computer science, the cryptographic community
values precision in definitions and rigorous reasoning. However, moral reasoning offers a pathway
towards a more formal definition. It involves constructing arguments supported by sound reasons
and conclusions, aiming for both accuracy and logical coherence.

“Our moral thinking should have two complementary goals: getting it right, and being able
to back up our views with flawless reasoning. We want the truth, both in the starting
assumptions we bring to an issue and in the conclusions we eventually arrive at. But we
also want to make sure that our views are supported by excellent reasons. And this provides
two tests for good moral reasoning: first, we must avoid false beliefs, and second, the logic
of our moral thinking must be rigorous and error-free.” [11, Ch. 1, Page 10]

The debate on the morality of cryptographic work centers around the balance between advancing
technological capabilities and addressing the ethical consequences of such advancements. Cryptog-
raphers must navigate complex ethical terrains where their work could both protect individual
privacy and enable surveillance. The moral character of cryptographic work demands a reflective
approach, considering how cryptographic tools and techniques impact societal norms and values.
This debate is not merely academic but has real-world implications, influencing policy decisions
and shaping the future of privacy and security in the digital age. Addressing these ethical concerns
requires an ongoing dialogue between technologists, ethicists, policymakers, and the public to ensure
that cryptographic advancements align with the broader societal good.
In other words, the absence of a code of conduct and ethics in the field could undermine its
future growth, especially as it attracts more scientists from diverse backgrounds and age groups.
We cannot assume that everyone will inherently adhere to the field’s ethical standards. However,
establishing clear ethical guidelines can ensure more precise and consistent statements from an
academic association, aligning its bylaws with the broader principles of scientific integrity and
morality.

1
Data retrieved from https://www.iacr.org/docs/
 5. CRYPTOGRAPHY, ANARCHISM AND THE FUTURE 7

5 Cryptography, Anarchism and the Future

As mentioned in Section 3, the Cypherpunk Manifesto and anarchism exhibit significant similarities.
The relationship between cryptography and anarchism is rooted in their shared emphasis on privacy,
individual freedom, and resistance to centralized control. Key points of intersection include:

– Privacy and Individual Autonomy: Anarchists advocate for individual autonomy and per-
sonal privacy, opposing any form of coercion or surveillance by the state or other centralized
authorities. Cryptographic technologies enable individuals to maintain their privacy and auton-
omy in the digital age.
– Resistance to Centralized Control: Anarchism opposes centralized control and hierarchical
structures, advocating for decentralized and voluntary associations. Cryptography supports
decentralized systems by enabling secure peer-to-peer communications and transactions without
relying on centralized authorities.
– Empowerment of Individuals: Anarchists aim to empower individuals by dismantling op-
pressive systems and enabling self-governance and mutual aid. Cryptographic tools empower
individuals to protect their own data and communications, giving them control over their digital
presence and interactions.
– Anonymity and Pseudonymity: Anonymity can be a tactic for anarchists to protect them-
selves from state repression and to organize without fear of retaliation. Cryptographic tech-
niques, such as Tor and anonymous cryptocurrencies, provide anonymity and pseudonymity,
allowing individuals to operate without revealing their identities.
– Philosophical Underpinnings: The philosophical underpinnings of anarchism include a strong
belief in personal liberty, non-coercion, and skepticism towards authority. The cypherpunk
movement, which champions the use of cryptography to achieve privacy and security, shares
similar philosophical values.
– Historical Context: Throughout history, anarchists have often used secret communication
methods to avoid detection and repression. The development of modern cryptographic tech-
niques has been partly motivated by the desire to protect individuals and groups from oppressive
regimes.

From these key points, it is evident that cryptography serves as a crucial tool to achieve various
anarchist objectives. Cryptographic methods have been tailored to meet specific needs within the
anarchist framework, such as ensuring secure communication channels, protecting the identities of
activists, and facilitating decentralized coordination. By enabling private and secure interactions,
cryptography helps anarchists resist surveillance and maintain operational security. This technologi-
cal empowerment allows for the practical application of anarchist principles, fostering environments
where decentralized and voluntary associations can thrive without external interference.
However, in recent years, the values that once underpinned cryptographic development seem to
have been overshadowed by a focus on financial gain. The rise of cryptocurrencies, while initially
aligned with ideals of decentralization and financial autonomy, has increasingly become dominated
by speculative interests and profit motives. This shift towards monetization risks undermining the
ethical foundations of cryptography, diverting attention away from its potential to protect privacy
and empower individuals. The community must remember the original values articulated by the
cypherpunks and strive to balance innovation with ethical considerations, ensuring that the pursuit
of profit does not eclipse the commitment to privacy and individual freedom.
8 Eric Blair

Cryptography has undergone significant changes since the introduction of the Diffie-Hellman
key exchange protocol. Initially, cryptography was a highly academic and scientific field focused
on theoretical advancements and the pursuit of knowledge. However, over time, it has evolved into
a commercial enterprise, with companies leveraging cryptographic technologies to develop and sell
products. This commercialization has shifted the focus from academic inquiry to market-driven
solutions, often prioritizing profit over the ethical and scientific values that originally guided the
field. It is crucial for the cryptographic community to reclaim its academic roots and reaffirm
its commitment to scientific rigor and ethical responsibility. We need to refocus on several key
academic aspects of cryptography. While the standardization process and secure implementations
are important, should they consume all our attention? What happened to exploring new attacks
and developing alternative cryptographic schemes?
The intersection of cryptography and anarchism reveals a profound alignment in their core
values of privacy, individual freedom, and resistance to centralized control. By exploring these
connections in detail, we can better understand the role of cryptographic technologies in advancing
these principles and addressing the ethical challenges that arise. The continued dialogue and collab-
oration between technologists, ethicists, and activists will be crucial in ensuring that cryptographic
advancements contribute to a freer and more just society.
Another critical point is the increasing distance between academic focus and the notion of “non-
profit” within our field. Should our primary goal not be the advancement of knowledge? When did
we lose our focus and allow large tech companies to dominate our conferences? For instance, how
can a student without substantial funding afford to attend a conference in a city like Zurich, with
registration fees around 450 euros, plus hotel and travel costs? While stipends offer a partial solution,
would it not be better to choose more affordable locations to let a broader participation? When did
we become so elitist that we cannot hold conferences in less well-known but more economical cities?
This shift towards high-cost venues limits accessibility and inclusivity, contrary to the foundational
values of academic and scientific inquiry.

References
1. ACM. Acm code of ethics and professional conduct.
2. American Mathematical Society (AMS). Ethical guidelines of the american mathematical society.
http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics, 2024. [Online; accessed 10-
May-2024].
3. Patrick D Anderson. Cypherpunk ethics: Radical ethics for the digital age. Routledge, 2022.
4. Mikhail Bakunin. Federalism, socialism, anti-theologism. Bakunin on Anarchy: Selected Works by the
Activist-Founder of World Anarchism, pages 102–147, 1867.
5. David Chaum. Security without identification: Transaction systems to make big brother obsolete.
Communications of the ACM, 28(10):1030–1044, 1985.
6. Whitfield Diffie and Susan Landau. Privacy on the Line: The Politics of Wiretapping and Encryption.
MIT Press, 2001.
7. Eric Hughes. A cypherpunk’s manifesto, 1993.
8. Nathaniel Karst and Rosa Slegers. Cryptography in context: co-teaching ethics and mathematics.
PRIMUS, 29(9):1039–1059, 2019.
9. Mathematical Association of America (MAA). Welcoming environment, code of ethics, and whistle-
blower policy. http://www.maa.org/about-maa/policies-and-procedures/welcoming-environment-code-
of-ethics-and-whistleblower-policy, 2024. [Online; accessed 10-May-2024].
10. Phillip Rogaway. The moral character of cryptographic work, 2015.
11. Russ Shafer-Landau. The fundamentals of ethics. Oxford University Press, 4 edition, 2018.