Trump has strong views on the internet. He ran his political campaign on Facebook and Twitter, urging America to ignore the mainstream press: to turn to the internet. He got “a lot of honesty over the internet”. However, he’s also pinpointed it as an arena ripe for cyber-crime, “the security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe it’s hardly doable.”
Trump is concerned about cyber attacks and the internet as a recruiting ground for terror. He calls cyber attacks the “warfare of the future” where “America’s dominance…must be unquestioned” and promises to develop weapons. Despite the decisive rhetoric, it is unclear how knowledgeable Trump is on the threats or the solutions. One strategy for securing “cyber” is “closing” parts of the internet. What he actually means is unclear. Does he mean to “turn off” parts of the internet that he doesn’t trust, or take out physical infrastructure in risky areas? He’s not sure how to do it: “We have to go see Bill Gates… We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that Internet up in some way”. “Somebody will say, ‘Oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech.’ These are foolish people.”
Trump’s plan is flawed. “The Internet is designed to be decentralized,” Andy Sellars, a fellow at Harvard Law School Cyberlaw Clinic, told TIME. “It’s designed to be that no single power could deny its use”. So in his desire to fight cyber war, Trump will need the help of the powerful media sites to block and remove content or, like China, ban undesirable sites. But how aggressive should Facebook, Twitter and Google be in Trump’s cyber war? There’s no simple algorithm. Not everyone who tweets #ISIS is bent on terror.
The power behind these huge internet companies may intimidate Trump. Glenn Kelman, chief executive of online real estate firm, Redfin, thinks Trump “feels hostility towards these companies and their size” and would embrace dictating terms. Trump already thinks Google is biased against him due to its positive autocorrect algorithms. And Facebook has the power to manipulate voters; it has had allegations of political bias in its trending topics and faced an internal investigation.
Trump’s also not happy with Apple. He’s likely to want them, and other developers, to create backdoors into their encryption codes. He’s already called for a boycott of Apple products after their refusal to unlock the phone of one of the San Bernardino shooters. “Who do they think they are?” he cried. Tim Cook explained Apple’s position: the “fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.” A backdoor for government agents is a backdoor for hackers.
Despite being in favour of regulating encryption, Trump is generally anti-regulation. He’s likely to be sympathetic to the firms who want changes to the rules on net neutrality. Currently, ISPs must treat all internet traffic equally. Broadband providers are not allowed to manipulate traffic, or costs, on their networks. Trump has already hinted at abandoning what he called President Obama’s “attack on the internet”.
Despite wanting to turn off part of the internet, Trump is “committed to preserving Internet freedom for the American people and citizens all over the world,” according to Stephen Miller, his National Policy director. He was opposed to President Obama turning over “control of the Internet” to “the United Nations and the international community”, fearing that “Internet freedom will be lost for good” with ICANN becoming fully independent.
Except, ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the Internet’s address book, has always been about coordination, not control. ICANN doesn’t deal with access to the internet or content. World wide web creator, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, told The Washington Post, it “has no power whatsoever over individual speech online… The actual flow of traffic, and therefore speech, is up to individual network and platform operators.” The government had a temporary contract overseeing ICANN which has expired. This hasn’t changed how ICANN works and Obama wasn’t giving away rights to the UN. The government involvement was “symbolic” .
However, by insisting that the United States retained “authority”, Trump risked giving others a platform to claim “control” of the Internet. Had the transition of ICANN been delayed, and DNS responsibilities shifted to the United Nations, other countries would have gained influence over global Internet policy.
Just like America, the internet under a Donald Trump Presidency looks confused. Trump’s statements point to restricting an arena that is defined by its inclusivity and openness. Just like his promise to build a wall around Mexico, Trump looks set to corral technology, blocking information and incorporating spy holes into operating systems. His view of the world wide web is at odds with America’s tech companies. Even Trump’s immigration policies could affect Facebook and others who rely heavily on talented workers from abroad.