Balancing Security and Privacy

We live in a world where security and privacy are often at odds. As shown in the first part of this graphic, national security—protecting people, physical assets, and our collective interests—tends to be the priority, sometimes at the cost of personal privacy. It’s a reality we all navigate, where safety often means giving up some control over our personal information.

But what if, in the future, we didn’t have to choose between the two? What if privacy and security could be achieved at high levels without undermining the other? The second part of the graphic illustrates this vision—where both privacy and security are treated as absolutes, operating on their own lines. This future isn’t a far-off dream, but we’re not there yet. So, what’s holding us back, and how long will it take?

Here’s a breakdown of the technologies that could bridge the gap and the challenges we need to overcome to make this future a reality:

1. Privacy-Preserving Technologies (PPTs): Homomorphic Encryption and Zero-Knowledge Proofs

• The Potential: These technologies allow governments to process data without seeing it. Imagine being able to ensure national security without anyone accessing personal details.
• Challenges: Homomorphic encryption is too slow for widespread, real-time use. It takes a lot of computing power, making large-scale deployment impractical. Zero-knowledge proofs are more viable but still complex to implement in systems as vast as those used by governments.
• How Long Until It’s Practical?: We could see scalable, real-time applications in 5 to 10 years as computing power increases and these technologies become more efficient. However, full integration into national security systems may take longer.
• References: https://www.appsflyer.com/glossary/privacy-preserving-technologies/ and https://web3illy.medium.com/fully-homomorphic-encryption-and-zero-knowledge-data-security-secrets-70d760c4de3d

2. Blockchain and Decentralized Identity (DID) Systems

• The Potential: Blockchain gives individuals control over their data, with decentralized identity (DID)allowing for secure identity verification without sharing personal details.
• Challenges: While viable in theory, blockchain faces scalability issues—it can be slow and resource-heavy. Additionally, governments and large institutions often resist decentralization because it means giving up control over centralized databases.
• How Long Until It’s Practical?: DID systems are already being developed by companies like Microsoft, but widespread adoption in government systems might take 5 to 10 years, depending on regulatory buy-in and scalability improvements.
• Reference: https://www.identity.com/decentralized-identity/

3. Federated Learning

• The Potential: Federated learning allows security systems to analyze data spread across multiple devices without centralizing personal data. Governments can detect threats while keeping personal data private.
• Challenges: While Google has successfully implemented this in limited use cases, deploying nationally is still technically complex. Ensuring trust in the decentralized nature of federated learning is a key hurdle.
• How Long Until It’s Practical?: We’re likely 3 to 5 years away from federated learning being used in more sensitive areas like national security. Trust and implementation at scale will be the biggest challenges.
• Reference: https://research.ibm.com/blog/what-is-federated-learning

3. AI and Differential Privacy

• The Potential: AI combined with differential privacy allows insights to be gained from data without revealing individuals’ identities. Companies like Apple and Google are already using it.
• Challenges: The balance between adding enough noise to protect privacy while still ensuring useful insights is tricky. For national security, governments may be reluctant to use “noisy” data for critical decision-making.
• How Long Until It’s Practical?: This is one of the more immediate solutions, and we could see it applied to broader use cases within 2 to 5 years as more trust is built around AI systems and governments refine how they handle “noisy” data.
• Reference: https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2023/12/nist-offers-draft-guidance-evaluating-privacy-protection-technique-ai-era

4. Post-Quantum Cryptography and Privacy-Preserving Biometrics

• The Potential: As quantum computing advances, current encryption methods will become obsolete, making post-quantum cryptography crucial. Privacy-preserving biometrics will ensure that, even in the future, our biometric data is secure without compromising privacy.
• Challenges: Quantum computing is still early, and widespread quantum threats are likely years away. Privacy-preserving biometrics are promising, but the technology is still maturing, and the public remains skeptical of how their data will be used.
• How Long Until It’s Practical?: Post-quantum cryptography will likely become more relevant in 10 to 20 years as quantum computing advances. Privacy-preserving biometrics may see broader use in 5 to 10 years, depending on public trust and technological progress.
• Reference: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/13/2/757

Why Aren’t We There Yet?

While the technologies are promising, several challenges are holding us back:

• Performance and Scalability: Many of these technologies, while viable, are still too slow or resource-intensive for large-scale use, especially in real-time national security operations.
• Institutional Inertia: Governments and organizations resist changing systems that have worked for decades. Shifting to decentralized or privacy-preserving systems requires substantial investment, training, and regulatory changes.
• Public Trust: Privacy concerns remain high, especially with technologies like biometrics and blockchain. Gaining the trust of the public is key to adoption.
• Cost: Implementing these technologies at scale would require significant investment. Governments and organizations must balance the costs with the potential benefits, which isn’t always easy to justify with immature technologies.

The Path Forward:

These technologies are viable, and we’re already seeing some early adoption in the private sector. However, the challenges of performance, cost, trust, and institutional resistance mean that fully integrating these solutions into national security and privacy systems will take time.

We may be 5 to 10 years away from seeing broader use of these technologies, and for some—like post-quantum cryptography—it could be even longer. The good news is that the gap between security and privacy is closing. With continued investment and technological progress, we can reach a future where security and privacy can be maximized—without compromising one another.

Bottom Line: The future of security and privacy isn’t an either/or decision. I believe both can be achieved with the right technologies and strategies, but it will take time and trust to get there.