http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&do
c=SPEECH/99/122|0|RAPID&lg=EN

---------------------------- CUT -----------------------------------

Speech by Mr Erkki LIIKANEN Member of the European Commission for 
Enterprise and Information Society Trust and Security in Electronic 
Communications : The European Approach Information Security Solutions 
Europe (ISSE 99)Welcome Address Berlin, 4 October 1999  


 DN: SPEECH/99/122     Date: 1999-10-05


     TXT: EN
     PDF: EN
     Word Processed: EN

SPEECH/99/122 

Speech by Mr Erkki LIIKANEN 

Member of the European Commission for Enterprise and Information 
Society 

Trust and Security in Electronic Communications : The European 
Approach 

Information Security Solutions Europe (ISSE 99) Welcome Address 

Berlin, 4 October 1999

1. INTRODUCTION 

Ladies and gentlemen, 

To start with, I would like to congratulate The European Forum for 
Electronic Business and Teletrust for organising this conference. A 
comprehensive European event on security held on a yearly basis was 
much needed in Europe. I therefore wish that ISSE will become a major 
event in Europe when it comes to discussing information security 
issues, not only amongst the converted, but also, and hopefully 
increasingly, the laymen.  

The very launch of this event, and the broad audience it attracted on 
its first edition, already demonstrates a few things: 

First, that there is a growing interest for information security 
issues in Europe. This is a direct result of the rapid growth of the 
Internet and electronic commerce in Europe. The latter is good news 
for Europe considering the growing importance of the networked 
economy in terms of growth and employment.  

Second, that European Union policies have been successful. I don't 
mean to take all the credit for the take-up of the Internet and 
electronic commerce in Europe especially since our conviction is that 
the development of the information society must, and can only be 
market-led. Yet it is clear that the liberalisation of 
telecommunications in the Union has created the right conditions for 
the expansion of the Internet and electronic commerce.  

2. WHY IS CRYPTOGRAPHY SO IMPORTANT? 

Cryptographic technologies are at the heart of information security. 
A few years ago, cryptography was still an arcane topic restricted to 
a closed circle of people in the known. It is only recently, with the 
growth of the Internet, that cryptography and on-line security has 
made it to the headlines.  

Why? Simply because cryptography is the preferred, if not only, means 
to ensure authenticity and confidentiality in electronic 
communications. Without it, there will be no safe electronic 
communications.  

The bottom line is: no security, no trust, no notable shift towards 
commercial and financial transactions on the Internet! And all the 
impressive forecasts we have seen regarding the growth of electronic 
commerce will remain pie in the sky.  

With close to 200 million Internet users, there is already, today, a 
strong market basis for security products and services. This is 
clearly indicated by the multiplication and the impressive growth 
figures of cryptographic companies. For the time being, the security 
market largely remains a corporate one. This is no surprise since 
business-to-business activities carried out over proprietary networks 
still account for over 85% of the total electronic commerce market.  

But the security market will only really explode once it becomes a 
mass market. 

The odds are, that the Internet will be everywhere in Europe in a 
matter of five years or so. We can expect half of the European 
population to be hooked on the Internet by 2005. Not only that there 
will be a computer connected to the Internet in half of Europe's 
homes. But access terminals become increasingly diversified and 
include, not only the computer, but increasingly the digital TV set-
top box, the personal assistant or the mobile phone, and very soon 
cars and even home appliances.  

But then again, who will routinely shop on-line if the credit card 
number cannot be transmitted safely? If there is no guarantee that 
the orders placed will be not fed into a marketing database to create 
a highly detailed buyer's profile?  

The same applies to simply surfing the Net. For how much longer will 
Internauts accept to leave footprints on every Web site they visit, 
allowing outsiders to track down their every move and interest? How 
many people will be discouraged from getting on-line by the fear of 
loosing their privacy?  

This means that all along the chain of Internet services, there is an 
essential need for security features.  

Since the technology is there, this doesn't seem to be a problem, 
only a breath-taking business opportunity for the cryptographic 
industry. But actually no! The situation can be compared to 
telecommunications services in Europe: Their growth is directly 
linked to the creation of a fully liberalised and coherent EU-wide 
market. Take mobile phones for example: The GSM technology may be 
great, but there wouldn't be 100 million GSM users in Europe today if 
it hadn't been for a comprehensive EU policy.  

In the same spirit, we are now working towards an Internal Market for 
cryptography.  

3. WHAT DOES THE COMMISSION DO ABOUT IT? 

More and more EU-based companies, including a growing number of SMEs, 
now think in terms of a Europe-wide market. This means that, at a 
time when companies increasingly rely on electronic communications to 
carry out their day-to-day business, incompatible national solutions 
in the field of cryptography create impediments that lessen the 
benefits of the Internal Market. Not to mention the problems creates 
for the cryptographic industry itself, whether it concerns, for 
instance:  

suppliers of encryption products engaged in intra-Community trade;  

or service providers that have to provide their clients with 
certificates that are legally valid throughout the Union.  

The Commission has addressed these issues in a pragmatic way, 
establishing a distinction between authentication and 
confidentiality, even though they both rely on the same cryptographic 
technologies.  

For authentication, we have tabled a draft Directive on electronic 
signatures which will secure the Internal Market for certificates and 
certification services. The aim is to have the European rules 
transposed into the national legislation of the 15 EU Member States 
by the end of the year 2000  

Things get more sensitive when it comes to confidentiality. The 
scrambling of electronic communications has raised some
legitimate public security concerns. Hence some reflections on how to 
ensure lawful access to encrypted data. 

Most of the proposed schemes have proved impracticable, a view the 
Commission has expressed in a policy paper in October 1997. This has 
been confirmed by the findings of EU-funded research projects in the 
field of cryptography.  

Member States are now increasingly sharing this view. The French 
government in particular has pledged to lift all restrictions to the 
use and supply of encryption products.  

Notwithstanding these developments, the Commission, under the 
Amsterdam Treaty, will work with Member States to ensure that, in a 
liberalised domestic environment, public safety will be fully 
guaranteed.  

What would then remain are export controls: 

For external trade, encryption products are controlled in accordance 
with the Wassenaar Arrangement.  

But there are also controls on shipments of encryption products 
within the Internal Market. We would like these intra-Community 
controls to be strictly limited. Indeed, create to burdens for 
European companies industry red tape, delays, uncertainty, etc. which 
put them at a competitive disadvantage.  

We hope Member States will soon come to an agreement on the new Dual 
Use Regulation, which aims to lift almost all controls on intra-
Community shipments of encryption products.  

4. WHAT ELSE CAN WE DO? 

Finally, I would like to focus on two other crucial issues. The first 
issue concerns the European cryptographic industry. It is a strong 
industry, it has state-of-the-art technology, and it has therefore 
the potential to impose itself on world markets. It would certainly 
highly benefit from improved regulatory conditions, but there is 
another major obstacle to its expansion.  

Currently, the desktop computing market is dominated by a few 
systems. This wouldn't be a problem in itself if those weren't 
proprietary systems. Building security solutions for systems when one 
has no access to the source code is certainly a major challenge. In 
fact, it means that there is a whole range of security products which 
European industry cannot supply.  

The solution to this problem certainly lies in non-proprietary and 
open source systems. This is the key to unlocking the potential of 
the desktop computing security market. This would also clearly be in 
the end users' interest. Not only would users enjoy a wider choice of 
security solutions, but they would also have a greater safety 
guarantee.  

How can governments, and in particular the Commission, contribute to 
promoting non-proprietary systems? 

One way is to raise awareness about them and their benefits  

Another could be to ensure that public tenders for computer equipment 
no longer specify particular systems.  

This issue is also closely linked to technology developments. 
Ultimately, the market will chose the more appropriate technological 
solutions. That is another area were we can help, notably under the 
Fifth Framework Programme, through our Information Society Technology 
Programme.  

Let me share with you my views on a second issue. I said earlier that 
the explosion of the cryptography market is pending a widespread take-
up of the Internet by the wider public and SMEs. Awareness is one 
requirement, to which I hope ISSE will contribute. The other is 
trust!  

In many other sectors of the economy, consumer trust is achieved 
through quality labels, for instance for foodstuff, toys or electric 
appliances. These can be industry-led or based on government rules; 
they can be attributed nationally or at European level.  

If security devices are to enter every home, they would certainly 
benefit from labels demonstrating that they are in conformity with 
quality requirements. This would greatly enhance consumer trust and 
confidence by allowing consumers to immediately identify safe 
information security products and services.  

5. CONCLUSION 

Ladies and gentlemen, 

What I wanted to do today is to demonstrate that the Commission is 
fully committed to the development of Internet security. I also 
wanted to show that, whether you are suppliers or users, we are 
trying hard to understand your needs. Finally, I wanted to get a few 
messages across and point at a few directions which we must further 
investigate. Let me wrap them up in a few words:  

1. Security is the key to securing users trust and confidence, and 
thus to ensuring the further take-up of the Internet. This can only 
be achieved if security features are incorporated in Internet 
services and if users have sufficient safety guarantees.  

2. Securing the Internal Market is crucial to the further development 
of the European security market, and thus of the European 
cryptographic industry. This requires an evolution of mentalities: 
Regulation in this field transcends national borders. Let's "think 
European".  

3. European governments and the Commission now have a converging view 
on confidentiality. We see this in Council, in Member State policies 
and in the constructive discussions we have. We must take this debate 
further and focus of the potential of encryption to protect public 
security rather than mainly seeing it as a threat to public order.  

4. Finally, the promotion of open source systems in conjunction with 
technology development is certainly one important step towards 
unlocking the potential of the desktop security market for the 
European cryptographic industry.  

I wish you all a great conference.  

---------------------------- CUT -----------------------------------

Reply via email to