The Crypto Wars: A Historical Background on Encryption in the US

November 18th, 2025
David Yu

The War on Encryption

The US war on encryption, also known as the “Crypto Wars,” to the controversy surrounding government attempts to weaken encryption and opposition from privacy advocates, computer scientists and mathematicians. In the early 1990s, the US restricted exports of encrypted technologies and attempted to gain backdoor access to encrypted communication. During the Cold War, the US and its allies developed several export control policies to prevent the Eastern Bloc from accessing Western technology. Technologies that were protected included technology specifically associated with weapons of war, such as munitions, and dual-use technology. During this time period, most encryption services were designed specifically for the military and were therefore protected as a part of the United States Munitions List. However, during the 1960s, financial institutions began to require strong commercial encryption to protect sensitive data, especially as wired money transfers grew more common. As a result, the US introduced the Data Encryption Standard in 1975, making commercial uses of encryption increasingly common.

The Clipper Chip

By the 1990s, concerns grew within the US government about widespread encryption, which hurt the ability of law enforcement to detect threats and allowed for criminals to communicate freely. Addressing these concerns, the National Security Agency (NSA) created the Clipper Chip in 1993, officially known as the MYK-78. It was a piece of hardware designed for phones that could provide encryption on communications while also producing an encryption key that was available to the NSA. The chip’s cryptographic algorithm, Skipjack, was also designed by the NSA. However, the program failed and was shut down in 1996 due to backlash from civil liberty groups, technical vulnerabilities in the chip, low adoption rates by telecommunications providers, and the availability of stronger encryption elsewhere.

Bullrun and Snowden Leaks

While the encryption debate seemed settled after the closure of the Clipper Chip, the NSA continued to grow increasingly concerned as encryption continued to become more widespread. As a result, they began working on a secret program called Bullrun that could crack encryption codes. Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, disclosed thousands of classified documents to journalists, leading to public outrage and distrust against the NSA and the privacy of their devices, sparking a new round of debates over mass data collection and privacy. The leaked documents revealed the extent of the NSA’s mass data collection: they circumvented and cracked encryption by creating backdoors and hacking to gain access to encrypted communications.

FBI vs Apple

The FBI has consistently criticised encryption and demanded backdoor access, citing national security concerns. One of the most prominent disputes was the legal conflict stemming from the 2015 San Bernardino shooting, where the FBI was unable to access the data on a phone used by one of the perpetrators. They requested that Apple to decrypt the data, and since Apple had no way to access the encrypted data, the FBI applied an order to require Apple to create a custom operating system that would allow them to bypass encryption. Apple refused to create this “master key,” arguing that it would compromise the privacy and security of millions of Americans. This case was later resolved when the FBI found a third party to unlock the phone and dropped their case.

Implications

The implications of these historical moments have profound impacts on the topic. By understanding the background of the controversy surrounding encryption, a multitude of common and nuanced arguments can be discovered and strengthened with empirics. Studying the failures/successes and the motives behind each policy and its opposition not only creates a better understanding of the topic, but may also help with preparing and justifying arguments in case. It’s important to learn from the past, and while often overlooked, analyzing the outcomes of past policies and actions can transform a prediction into a persuasive argument.