Differential Cryptanalysis of Data Encryption Standard

Question: Discuss about the Differential Cryptanalysis of Data Encryption Standard. Answer: Introduction: Innumerable scholars have provided different opinions regarding the importance of email privacy especially at the workplace. An unauthorized access happens only when the email is transit. There are several more reasons of reducing email privacy. Whenever the data is stored on the email server or within a user computer, the data can be easily accessed. However, this particular study has provided an in-depth understanding on the importance of keeping privacy on email. An employee while working within the business organization should use company email so that the rate of unauthorized private email hacking can be reduced. In this particular topic, many eminent scholars have provided necessary solutions on how email, data, chats and necessary information can be protected from the hackers. As per the Australian law, the business employers have the right to spy on how the organizational employees are using email at the workplace. Employees do not have right to open their private mail sitting at the workplace. As a result, the rate of email privacy is very high. However, this particular study has provided a deep insight in how email privacy can be maintained. The several importance of email privacy has clearly been mentioned in this particular study. In addition, the value of encryption process has also been discussed in this particular context. Many eminent scholars have pointed out that encryption process is the effective way for protecting data. At the same time, it is undeniable that this particular systematic procedure demolishes the rhythmic process of business. As per the decision of European Court of human rights, it has been observed that employees can be discharged instantly if they are caught at the workplace in private chatting (newsroom.com.au 2016). After the decision of European Court of human rights, many eminent scholars have opined their strong point of views. Bellare, Keelveedhi and Ristenpart (2013) stated that the decision of ECHR was completely reasonable as private email affects the effective performance of employees. The author has opined that whenever an employee has to provide effective service process for rendering the success of organization, this individual has to provide full dedication towards the business service (Biham and Shamir 2012). Any kind of private email can become a matter of distraction for the individual. Therefore, most of the recognizable business organizations such as Woolworths, B2M Solutions, The Iconic, Rio Tinto and so many have strictly prohibited opening private email at the workplace. Based on the opinion of previous author, Brakerski and Vaikuntanathan (2014) has strongly differed in this context. As per the opinion of this particular scholar, organization should take the responsibility for maintaining employee email privacy at the workplace. Employees should never instruct not to open their private email at the workplace. The author has stated that liberty and democratic leadership culture is one of the most effective ways to get good performance from the employees. The organization should never impose the email privacy law at the workplace (Brakerski, Gentry and Vaikuntanathan 2012). Therefore, the author in this article has strictly opposed the decision of European Court of human rights. As per the opinion of this author, the success of a business organization is highly dependent on the employee performance. Employee would perform well only when the organization would like o maintain an effective employee relation at the workplace. Employers should never impose any decision on the employees. Therefore, the organizations can use encryption process in order to maintain employee email privacy rather than forcing employees not to open email at the workplace. Email privacy at a workplace in a true sense is highly important. Daemen and Rijmen (2013) commented that business organizations should maintain this process effectively in order to secure necessary data and information. Different scholars are primarily concerned on maintaining email privacy. The procedure of maintaining privacy can be different. Behind taking the decision of European Court of human rights, some of the most important reasons were there. Employee email privacy protects important data and information, be it official or personal. Official information can be protected with the process of encryption. This particular process does not allow any unauthorized user to open data and information. Therefore, organizations can use encryption while transferring their official records. On the other hand, maintaining the privacy of email has become one of the major factors for transferring official data and information in a secured process (Evans-Lacko and Knapp 2014). Most of the business organizations like to transfer their financial records through email. Therefore, the employees have to maintain privacy so that data cannot be leaked out by any chance. That is one of the most important reasons business organizations have restricted the employees from opening private emails at the workplace so that their personal data can b e secured. Garg et al. (2013) opined that employees in general like to secure financial and banking information in their private email. Therefore, if an individual intends to open personal mail id at the workplace, the relevant data and information can be hacked at any time. In order to overcome this kind of unexpected situation, the business organizations have decided to prohibit opening mail id at the workplace. The report says that one engineer had been sacked from a reputed organization of Australia due to chat with his finance head with the help of Yahoo messenger. With the help of surveillance technology, the engineer had been caught at the workplace. This particular incident had a major significance on the realm of business industry. The organizational employees felt extreme de-motivated while performing at the workplace. Gentry, Halevi and Smart (2012) opined that the employees performance was falling day by day as they failed to find any motivation within the business organization. Li et al. (2013) opined against the incident that, employers have to focus on whether the employees are meeting their daily target or not. If the employees are successful to meet daily target they should never be imposed on any additional rules and regulations. However, this particular opinion has been strongly opposed on behalf of many contemporary scholars. Nielsen and Randall (2012) commented that employees email privacy has been implemented for the sake of benefits of every individual employee. In order to protect relevant data at the workplace, the organization has prevented the rule of opening personal mail id. In many cases, it has been observed that other employees or senior executives of business organization intend to access others personal mail id and leak those data out. As a result, this particular individual has suffered immensely after exposing all the records at the workplace. In order to overcome these kinds of unexpected situation, the organization has decided to ban opening personal email at the workplace. Australian workplace lawyer, Stevenson has stated his opinion on occasion, If a private mobile phone was brought to work and the employers wi-fi system was being used there, there would be nothing on the face of it that would stop the employer from being able to surveil that mobile phone (newsroom.com.au 2016). After making this comment, the business employers of many organizations of Australia had made a firm protest. According to them employee email privacy helps to protect their important data and information from being leaked out in front of numerous persons. This particular rule should not be circulated in a negative way. Snchez Abril, Levin and Del Riego (2012) stated that the primary purpose of prohibiting private email at the workplace is not to impose unnecessary decision on the employees, but to keep them safe and secured. However, after the immense challenges and controversies happening at the workplace regarding employee email privacy, it has been observed that organizations have focused on encryption. As a result, the machine would never be able to entertain any unauthorized users for opening any data. As a result, in the absence of true user, not a single person would be able to access data and information from machine. Most of the corporate sectors, government sectors of Aust ralia have implemented encryption for using the necessary data and information safely and securely. Conclusion: The study has provided a critical analysis whether employee email privacy is important at the workplace or not. Various scholars have expressed their own opinion on different way by supporting or opposing the point of views. Based on the point of view of different scholars, it has been evaluated that maintaining employee email privacy at the workplace is highly important for securing appropriate data and information, be it professional or personal. At the same time, it is also undeniable that employers should never impose any decision on the mind of employees forcefully. Ultimately, the organizational culture and behavior is highly affected. In this kind of situation, the business employers can make an effective session with the employees for which they can make the workers understand on the reasons of disallowing private email at the workplace. Effective interaction would help the business experts to make a fruitful interaction with the employees in order to convince them about the importance of email privacy at the workplace. Reference List: Bellare, M., Keelveedhi, S. and Ristenpart, T., 2013, May. Message-locked encryption and secure deduplication. InAnnual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques(pp. 296-312). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Biham, E. and Shamir, A., 2012.Differential cryptanalysis of the data encryption standard. Springer Science Business Media. Brakerski, Z. and Vaikuntanathan, V., 2014. Efficient fully homomorphic encryption from (standard) LWE.SIAM Journal on Computing,43(2), pp.831-871. Brakerski, Z., Gentry, C. and Vaikuntanathan, V., 2012, January. (Leveled) fully homomorphic encryption without bootstrapping. InProceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference(pp. 309-325). ACM. Daemen, J. and Rijmen, V., 2013.The design of Rijndael: AES-the advanced encryption standard. Springer Science Business Media. Evans-Lacko, S. and Knapp, M., 2014. Importance of social and cultural factors for attitudes, disclosure and time off work for depression: Findings from a seven country European study on depression in the workplace.PloS one,9(3), p.e91053. Garg, S., Gentry, C., Halevi, S., Raykova, M., Sahai, A. and Waters, B., 2013, October. Candidate indistinguishability obfuscation and functional encryption for all circuits. InFoundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2013 IEEE 54th Annual Symposium on(pp. 40-49). IEEE. Gentry, C., Halevi, S. and Smart, N.P., 2012, April. Fully homomorphic encryption with polylog overhead. InAnnual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques(pp. 465-482). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Li, M., Yu, S., Zheng, Y., Ren, K. and Lou, W., 2013. Scalable and secure sharing of personal health records in cloud computing using attribute-based encryption.IEEE transactions on parallel and distributed systems,24(1), pp.131-143. newsroom.com.au., 2016. Wieck Australasia Newsroom. (2016).Newsroom.com.au. Retrieved 18 December 2016, from https://newsroom.com.au Nielsen, K. and Randall, R., 2012. The importance of employee participation and perceptions of changes in procedures in a teamworking intervention.Work Stress,26(2), pp.91-111. Snchez Abril, P., Levin, A. and Del Riego, A., 2012. Blurred boundaries: Social media privacy and the twenty?first?century employee.American Business Law Journal,49(1), pp.63-124.