The Political Significance of Cryptography

17h-21h May 5th + Petite Salle / Centre Pompidou

Although historically cryptography has been restricted to government and industrial use, there has recently, after revelations of mass surveillance by Snowden, been increased interest in securing the everyday communications of citizens: Applications such WhatsApp, Telegram, Silence,, Signal, and even PGP all claim to use end-to-end encrypted messaging to secure the content of communication. There has been discussion in France after the Bataclan attacks of banning end-to-end encryption, and in recent weeks, Macron wanted to keep end-to-end encryption legal but have all passwords available to the government. Rumors of hacking now dominate the news, and are claimed even influence elections. Given that cryptography has moved from an obscure branch of mathematical number theory to a real-world problem, the NEXTLEAP project is drawing together an interdisciplinary group of cryptographers, activists, and philosophers to discuss the political significance of cryptography.

Get your FREE ticket

17:00 Between Secrecy and transparency

Bernard Stiegler

Digital networks are disrupting public space from the bottom up, first and foremost because they utilize publication technologies that completely reshape the relationship between public and private, in every sense of these terms. In so doing, they redefine from their very roots the questions, paradoxes and aporias that positive law – from ancient Greece and through Rome, canonical law, the Napoleonic code, and all the theories and philosophies of ‘natural law’ from the classical age to modern and contemporary critiques of law – has always sought to resolve in social terms.

Digital and computational technology has made it possible to greatly expand the spheres of publication, and hence of transparency – as for example with open data. In this respect, it has enabled democratic safeguards to be strengthened, such as those that depend upon the publication of government data and facts, and the requirement to publish this data and these facts in accordance with legal obligations.

The transparency of rules, data and facts, however, should in no case mean the elimination of the secret. On the one hand, public rules and public data are in fact themselves never ‘transparent’: they must be interpreted. On the other hand, the revelations of Edward Snowden have made it obvious that transparency conceived as the transgression of all limits and the elimination of all secrecy would constitute a fundamental violation of the very possibility of law, namely, the legitimate possibility of secret deliberation, whether this is a matter of:

  • a public figure of authority who, either individually or collectively, deliberates in secret as part of a negotiation (that is, of a balance of power), this being the framework that perpetually constitutes political life, given that the latter consists in authorizing peaceful conflicts, that is, the diversity of opinion, but where this also applies to economic conflicts, that is, legitimate competition;
  • or an ordinary person who, in a lawful state, has the right to cultivate feelings and ideas that he or she prefers to keep secret – a right to secrecy that is the condition of possibility of any singularity whatsoever, and of every protection of what, as singularity, is the guarantee of the possibility of a future, that is, of a capacity to transform the law in the course of a process of psychic and collective individuation in which the psychic individual can and must differentiate and individuate itself, and for which the legal collective individuation codified by law constitutes, precisely in that, its legality.

18:30 Panel

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed molestie, quam eu dictum ultricies, risus libero ultricies nibh, eleifend luctus libero mi eget metus. Phasellus mollis viverra eros, id tempus nulla fringilla sit amet. Nunc sit amet nulla in dolor imperdiet interdum. Sed facilisis, tortor in luctus sollicitudin, sapien metus pellentesque velit, in iaculis velit tortor in eros. In dapibus consequat arcu, ullamcorper consectetur ante imperdiet ut.

Moderator: Harry Halpin

Tanja Lange
University Eindhoven, Project co-ordinator of PQCRYPTO (Post-Quantum Cryptography)
Daniel Bernstein
University Illinois/Eindhoven, inventor of Curve25519
Moti Yung
Snapshot, inventor of cryptovirology and kleptography
Slim Amamou
Tunisian Blogger/Activist, former Secretary of State post-2011 revolution
Philip Rogaway
University of California, Author of "The Moral Character of Cryptographic Work"

20:00 NEXTLEAP researchers

Researchers and Ph.D. students funded by the EC NEXTLEAP proposal will present their work in progress, including the unveiling of a platform to collectively discuss Internet Rights.

Marios Isaakidis
Bodgan Kulynych
Formal Verification
Ksenia Ermoshina
High-risk activist STS of crypto
Holger Krekel
Vincent Puig
Net Rights Contributions


Petite Salle
Centre Pompidou

  • Rambuteau (M11)
  • Hotel de Ville (M1, M11)
  • Les Halles (RER A, B, D, M4, M14)