Adam Caudill

Security Leader, Researcher, Developer, Writer, & Photographer

DEFCAD & Freedom of Information

Freedom of speech is, in my opinion, the single most important and inalienable right that humanity has. This isn’t a privilege granted by a government, it’s an innate right of humanity. It’s a right that is essential to the preservation of many other freedoms – without it, there is no freedom, there is no liberty.

Earlier today a friend posted something on Twitter, I started to retweet it, but after some thought decided I needed to say more than I could fit in 140 characters. I feel rather strongly about this one.

This is of course about the mess going on around DEFCAD which was told(PDF) to remove 3D models of the Liberator gun and various other gun parts.

The DEFCAD site currently has this message up:

DEFCAD files are being removed from public access at the request of the US Department of Defense Trade Controls.

Until further notice, the United States government claims control of the information.

From reading the letter from the Office of Defense Trade Compliance, a part of the State Department, the issue is not that DEFCAD is distributing the information – but who can access it. By it’s very nature, any thing put on the internet is accessible by anyone around the world – the restrictions that could, and I believe will, be imposed will make DEFCAD’s mission impossible.

The restrictions that ITAR imposes makes it impossible to make this kind of material available – even with IP restrictions, there’s no way to know who is accessing this information.

In this case, ITAR has restricted an inalienable right – the right to free speech. Cody Wilson, as the face and voice of DEFCAD, has been told to withhold information – his free speech denied. This isn’t about shipping illicit guns to war torn countries – this is about making information available to the public. Theses aren’t stolen plans from a defense contractor, or the design of a new military weapon – it’s about a man that decided to share his knowledge of something he created and a government that told him to stop.

I should point out, I’m no fan of guns – I don’t own one and probably never will. I have mixed feelings about the proliferation of guns, but I have no mixed feeling about freedom of speech or attempts to suppress it. So this isn’t about guns for me, this is about an attempt to suppress knowledge.

Very, very, few people around the world have access to the type of 3D printer necessary to make a copy of the Liberator – the first item on the ODTC’s list and the design that put DEFCAD on everybody’s radar. So there really isn’t much risk of people making one – and the design is quite primitive as guns go. The Liberator is simple; it has only 15 plastic parts and one nail, less advanced than the gun it was named for – the FP-45 Liberator which was dropped in various countries during WWII (with less concern than what the US Government shows for its namesake). Does anyone really think that other countries are so far behind the US that they don’t have something more advanced than this?

An engineering student, in any country, with access to a CNC machine (which is cheaper and easier to get than the 3D printer used to make the Liberator) can make a weapon far more effective, and far more advanced. From a technology perspective, it’s simply not a threat. One can only speculate about what has really motivated the government’s actions.

This attempt to suppress information has had its usual effect – it’s widely available and has been downloaded more that it ever would have been had the government said nothing. Ah, the Streisand effect, will people ever learn? While the Liberator design and the other files on DEFCAD are safe (for now at least), it’s certain that this will have a chilling effect on Wilson and anyone else researching this.

Perhaps it’s not the Liberator that they wanted to stop – but whatever design that was going to be next. In that, it’s likely they have succeeded.

Adam Caudill


Related Posts

  • Utopia Found; Utopia Lost

    Sometime in the 1990’s I used a 2400-baud modem and connected to the internet for the first time; I found a new world, a better world. A world where ideas and intellect set people apart, not skin color, or political affiliation, of even the pseudo-scandal of the day (which is probably just a disguise for ignorance and intolerance). It was a time of invention, in a world where everything was new and the potential was unlimited.

  • First, Do No Harm: Developers & Bad APIs

    Primum non nocere (first, do no harm) – an iconic phrase in modern medicine, yet also applicable to many other fields. This is something I wish more people would think about, developers especially – and primarily when writing new APIs. In general, developers don’t have an impressive history with security – quite frankly, developers suck. Seeing as I consider myself a developer, that’s painful to admit. Chris Andrè Dale posted an interesting article some time ago that got me thinking: Why it’s easy being a hacker: A SQL injection case study – Chris pointed out the problems with educational material that developers are using, and just how bad the examples are.

  • Twitter Becomes a Walled Garden

    Today is a red letter day in the history of Twitter, though not in a good way. Twitter has a long reputation of free speech, providing a platform for all that wanted it, easily connecting to the powerful, building communities, and organising against tyranny. This didn’t come without controversy of course; in the effort to keep the platform safe, more and more moderation was implemented - sometimes the got it right, sometimes they got it wrong.

  • Death, Cancer, and Missed Chances

    In early December, about a month ago, I had the to perform one of the hardest tasks I’ve ever faced as a leader, letting my team know that a colleague had passed away. She was a friend to us all, and the glue that held the team together; telling them that she was gone was, without question, the hardest thing I’ve had to do in a work setting. What made this so hard was not just what I was telling them, but my own feelings for her as a friend, and the opportunity I had missed.

  • Leading Experts

    A friend of mine recently asked for my thoughts on leading people who have more experience or expertise in a topic than they do; this is an important question and one that I felt deserved more thought and exploration. Leading people can be difficult, but when leading people that know more than you do about a given topic, it’s a different challenge. This was particularly well-timed, as I’ve found myself in just that situation, as I’ve just hired a specialist in incident response.