Digital Fortress by Dan Brown

I had read book a long time ago and I know I lent this book out to someone but am not sure if I got it back. I have spent a long time searching through the fairly big library of mine especially when I was clearing out the ones I did not wish to take with me to Australia. Eventually I found it as an ebook. I have read all the books by Dan Brown at least a couple of times. He writes with the fairly believable plot, but one needs to remember that this is a fiction and not get carried away as people did with The Da Vinci Code. That was a pure blend of fact and fiction to make it believable.

This book is a 1998 publication but still feels fresh today as it reflects more of what is happening now with regards to spying on people via the net in the name to preventive measures against terrorism. It is entirely plausible when there is so much fear over terrorist attacks and it appears that governments think it is justified in having access to email, mobile calls, text messaging and all such electronic communication media. The central quote on which the whole plot revolves is "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" (who will guard the guards?)

The very hush hush national security agency has a department just to pick up communications all around the world and analyse them, break the code if necessary and establish if it provides evidence of terrorist activity. The story begins with Deputy Director calling in his best code breaker and protégée to help him. He has been trying to decode a programme called ‘digital fortress’ which is supposed to be unbreakable code. It has been designed by a brilliant employee who was forced to leave the service under a cloud, after being bad mouthed by the agency. He was a man who believed that human beings have a right to privacy and delving into the communication of innocent people was not ethical. He is the man who has developed digital fortress as an unbreakable code.

The programme has been made available on the internet free of cost. The key to using this software was going to be auctioned and once that got out it would revolutionise communications as it would guarantee complete privacy. This in turn would make the latest toy of the agency obsolete; a toy that had been kept a closely guarded secret and is capable of breaking all the current codes employed by electronic communications. The programme has been in the code breaker from over 15 hours and this is unprecedented, maybe the code is unbreakable after all.

The deputy director sends off a civilian to get the personal effects of the creator of the digital fortress who has passed away in Spain. He may have been carrying the password key on him and so having access to it they could stop the auction and thereby stop anyone using this unbreakable code. The plot thickens when a couple of employees turn up unexpectedly on this Saturday. Will they twig as to what is happening in the code breaker? Does one of them have anything to do with the digital fortress (for it is suspected that there maybe a partner holding a second copy of the password)? Will David (the civilian) find anything important in the personal effects of the code maker? Who is the man stalking David across the city?

Like the other books by Dan Brown the story has twists and turns. The griping plot keeps you reading and forces you to think. It is true - who will guard the guardian? Setting precedents is dangerous and so is developing machines that allow governments to invade people’s privacy. Even if one accepts that the current government are ethical guardians what happens if they stop being ethical or the government changes? So will the digital fortress change the balance of power in the favour of those who want to spy on our communications? Certainly the end is at one level expected, for of course we cannot have an unbreakable code floating in this world threatening our ’safety’ but also unexpected as to the complicated game being played by two adversaries who were the deputy director and the code maker. One trying to ensure every code is broken leaving all communications open to the prying eyes of the government and the other believing we have a right to privacy. So who is eventually seen as the unethical one, who has stepped out of the line to follow his beliefs?