Bill C-22, the government’s lawful access legislation, is awaiting Senate consideration this fall with the encryption provisions likely to be the centre of attention given diametrically opposing views from law enforcement and technology companies and experts. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree told the Toronto Star earlier this month that the bill strikes “the right balance” on encryption, claiming that cracking encryption is “off limits” except in “extenuating circumstances” where there is a “minor opening,” and that “everybody has had to have some water in their wine.” The government’s approach follows the typical legislative playbook of seeking a middle ground that stakeholders can (sometimes reluctantly) live with. Yet the past few weeks have produced an unusual situation in which both sides say no viable middle ground exists. Police claim the bill’s encryption provisions do little to change what they can obtain under existing law. Nearly two dozen technology companies and industry groups argue the same provisions leave every user at risk since even partial weakening of encryption undermines its effectiveness.
Post Tagged with: "security"
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 270: Roundtable on the Bill C-22 Risks for Canadian Tech Companies Featuring VPN Services Tailscale and Windscribe
Over the past week, the concerns over Bill C-22, the government’s lawful access bill, continued to mount. Many companies, notably including Apple, Google, Meta, Signal, and DuckDuckGo, have spoken out against the bill. So too has the VPN sector, with some warning that they can’t remain in Canada if the bill goes ahead as is. This week, the CEOs of two of the companies that have spoken out against Bill C-22 join the Law Bytes podcast to explain. Avery Pennerun, the CEO of Tailscale, and Yegor Sak, the CEO of Windscribe, explain their businesses, discuss concerns about mandatory metadata retention and backdoor access to encryption, and consider what the law might mean for the future of their companies in Canada.
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 269: Inside the Bill C-22 Committee Hearing for the Case Against Government’s Lawful Access Plans
The government’s lawful access bill has been the target of criticism for weeks, with companies, governments, and experts on privacy and security all sounding the alarm. Much of the momentum against the bill began to build once the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security held hearings on the legislation, providing an opportunity for critics to voice their concerns. Those hearings continue this week with both Google and Apple scheduled to appear.
For this episode of the Law Bytes podcast, I go into the hearing room for my appearance on Bill C-22. The appearance was a rerun of the podcast episode featuring a roundtable on the bill with David Fraser and Robert Diab. This episode features my opening statement and exchanges with MPs from all parties on a wide range of issues.
The Government Tries to Make the Case for Bill C-22: Why Its Own Use Cases Reveal Disproportionate Overreach
Faced with growing criticism of Bill C-22, the government this week mounted a coordinated defence, with senior officials from CSIS, the RCMP, and Public Safety Canada sitting for on-the-record briefings with the Globe and Mail, the CBC, and others. While officials tried to make the case for lawful access, they failed to make the case for Bill C-22, as their use cases reveal a consistent pattern of overreach. Indeed, whether the issue is metadata retention or the technical capabilities the bill would mandate, the powers it would grant extend well beyond the targeted needs the officials describe, resulting in a disproportionate bill in need of significant amendment.
Tech Exodus: Why Bill C-22’s Privacy and Security Risks Will Drive Digital Services Out of the Country
Over the past week, a growing number of tech companies have warned that they may be forced to leave Canada if Bill C-22, the lawful access bill, remains unchanged. The government’s response to warnings from Signal, Windscribe, NordVPN, Apple, and Meta is that the companies are misreading the bill. But the prospect of a tech exodus from Canada rests on clear-cut privacy and security risks that do not apply in the U.S. or Europe. When Yegor Sak, the Toronto-headquartered CEO of Windscribe, told the Globe and Mail last week that he is actively looking at moving the company out of Canada or when Signal’s Vice President of Strategy and Global Affairs Udbhav Tiwari told the same paper that Signal “would rather pull out of the country than be compelled to compromise on the privacy promises we have made to our users,” those statements are a direct response to the government’s legislative choices in the Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act (SAAIA), the second half of Bill C-22, that will have serious economic implications for the future of the tech sector in Canada.
Recent Posts
The What, Me Worry? Consultation: Media Quietly Tells Government It Wants Even More Funding With Little Concern for Independence Risks 
Years of Uncertainty: Bill C-22’s Missing Regulations and Secret Ministerial Orders 
The Missing Charter Statement: Why Hasn’t the Government Explained How Bill C-34’s Social Media Ban Complies with the Charter? 
Three Years After October 7th: Living With the Shockwaves 
What If the U.S. Demanded This? The Cloud Provider Conditions Behind Canada’s EU Digital Pivot
