Help Stop Political and Racial Bias at the IACR

IACRBias is an initiative dedicated to documenting allegations of political and racial bias within the International Association for Cryptologic Research (IACR)'s Board of Directors. Our goal is to present a clear timeline of events so that members of the cryptography community—and the broader public—can understand the context and consider signing a petition to decry these instances of bias.

After reviewing this material, we encourage you to consider signing our petition or otherwise making your voice heard through official IACR channels.

The IACR Board Treats Different Groups Differently

On October 18^th, 2023, the IACR Board of Directors issued a strongly worded statement regarding the atrocities committed by Hamas and targeting Israeli civilians. This statement condemned the violence and stood in solidarity with the people of Israel. According to Section 3.5 of the IACR Board Minutes for October 2023, the statement was approved immediately upon proposal, with minimal debate.

In November 2023, with the goal of equal consideration for all constituencies, the IACR Board was asked to issue a statement showing sympathy for Palestinian civilian casualties at the hands of the Israel Defense Forces. According to Section 3.2 of the IACR Board Minutes for November 2023, the Board declined:

“There are atrocities happening all over the world, and the IACR is not commenting on them all. […] The discussion reaches the conclusion that a further statement from IACR is not justified at this point.”

Despite the above quote, it is important to note that the Board had already issued solidarity statements on a variety of global issues, including the wars in Ukraine and Israel, Australian trade controls acts, United States immigration policy and more over a period of eleven years. During those eleven years, the only times where the IACR Board rejected statements were when they involved Arab-origin civilians.

In April 2024—after considerable advocacy—the Board agreed in principle to amend its statement on Israel to include “the situation in Gaza.” During its May 2024 Board meeting, the Board settled on final language that offered only a minor amendment to the original statement, mentioning Gaza but without detailing any harm to Palestinian civilians or their situation on par with the original statements about Israel.

Below is a comparison suggesting the IACR Board exhibits different levels of concern depending on which group is affected:

The IACR Board Declined a Petition from 40 IACR Members

In September 2024, over 40 IACR members delivered a petition requesting that the IACR Board:

1. Issuance of an Official Statement: Immediately affirm sympathy for Lebanese victims and condemn indiscriminate attacks against civilians by the IDF, matching the tone of the October 18^th, 2023 statement for Israel.
2. Adoption of a Balanced Communication Policy: Ensure future Board statements acknowledge significant events affecting IACR members without bias. For non-cryptography issues, any official statement made in the Association’s name should be based on a full vote of all members.
3. Promotion of Inclusivity: Reaffirm a commitment to an inclusive environment where nationality, ethnicity, or background do not influence Board decisions.

Despite garnering more support from membership than petitions for Ukraine or Israel, the Board refused, in an October 2024 Board meeting (the minutes of which were published over four months after the meeting had occured), to issue an independent statement in support of Palestinian or Lebanese casualties. In a decision that was published almost five months after the petition was communicated, on February 12^th, 2025, the Board wrote:

“It is pointed out that the existing statements have always meant to include future victims of the conflict, indiscriminately, expressing sympathy and support to ‘all those who are suffering its ongoing consequences’, and ‘in Gaza, Israel, and elsewhere’.”

In the reasoning described above, the IACR Board ignores the disparity between its statements regarding Arab and non-Arab populations, as shown in Table 1. In this same Board meeting, the board mentioned “parallel harassment”, likely alluding to the petition and accompanying advocacy campaign. By attempting to discredit concerns about bias, the Board appeared to deflect legitimate scrutiny of its inconsistent treatment of different groups, as clearly documented in Table 1. This framing suggests an unwillingness to acknowledge or address the disparity in how statements about Arab and non-Arab civilians were handled. Furthermore:

1. The Board interpreted the petition as requesting yet another amendment to the Israel statement, despite the petition clearly requesting an independent, equitable statement regarding Lebanese victims and condemning indiscriminate attacks against civilians by the IDF.
2. The Board completely ignored the third request, asking it to promote inclusivity by reaffirming a commitment to an inclusive environment where nationality, ethnicity, or background do not influence Board decisions.

In November 2024, the International Criminal Court charged the Prime Minister of Israel with war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The IACR Board Delayed Publishing Meeting Minutes

The Board began to greatly delay the publishing of its meeting minutes starting in September 2024, immediately after the above petition was first delivered, making it difficult for IACR members to understand how decisions are reached and whether they follow previously established norms. Prior to September 2024, the IACR Board published meeting minutes within two months of a Board meeting. Immediately after the petition was delivered, on September 26^th, 2024, the IACR board extended that delay to over four months:

No explanation or justification was ever provided for this sudden extreme delay, despite it being pointed out to the Board by multiple IACR members.

Reports of Racially Motivated Incivility at IACR Events

Multiple members report that the IACR Board’s selective approach to public statements has contributed to a climate in which some attendees feel emboldened to express discriminatory views:

• Boasting About War Crimes at IACR Events: Participants at Real World Cryptography Symposium 2024 allegedly heard individuals from the Israeli Ministry of Defense bragging about harming civilians.
• Racial Supremacy Claims: A senior IACR member allegedly stated that Israeli or Jewish scholars are “more central to cryptography” than others.
• Islamophobic Content: IACR members, including tenure-track professors, sharing posts broadly labeling Arabs or Muslims as terrorists.

While these claims are based on individual reports, many members view them as indicative of the hostile climate that can arise when leadership shows selective solidarity.

Structural Impediments to Accountability

The IACR Ethics Committee's mandate concerns the “fairness and ethical aspects of all matters under the influence of the IACR, such as its operations, its events, and its publications.”

Formal complaints to the IACR Ethics Committee citing the Board’s role in enabling bias have proven challenging, because many Ethics Committee members also sat on on the IACR Board at the date of the petition's submission, raising questions about impartiality:

Neither the Board of Directors nor the Ethics Committee have recognized the above conflict of interest or its potential impact on being able to hold the Board of Directors accountable for ethical violations, despite it being pointed out repeatedly by multiple IACR members.

Why This Website?

The aim of this website is not to provoke the Board or discredit its broader governance, but rather to ensure these concerns are documented transparently. We believe public awareness can encourage thoughtful, constructive reform.

We do not dispute the Board’s authority to create policies or issue statements, but we do ask for consistency and equal respect for all members, regardless of national or ethnic background.

Although the Board may argue that investigating every global conflict is unfeasible, the key grievance here is inconsistency: The Board issued unprompted statements for Ukraine and Israel but refused similar sympathy for Arab civilian casualties, even when supported by a large membership petition. Many IACR members would welcome a more transparent policy--or even no policy at all--if it were applied consistently, without selectivity that appears to target certain groups.

The reality is that publicly challenging the status quo—especially on issues of political and racial bias—within small, tightly knit academic communities carries significant personal risks, both professionally and interpersonally. As a Lebanese researcher, I find no personal gain in stirring controversy; if anything, my decision to speak out is driven by moral conviction, not the pursuit of attention. I do so because remaining silent in the face of selective solidarity ultimately enables injustice. By drawing attention to these inconsistencies, I hope to encourage a more consistent, inclusive, and transparent IACR for everyone.

The IACR Board of Directors, as well as the IACR Ethics Committee, were provided a full advance copy of this webpage on January 23^rd, 2025, and given an opportunity to address any inaccurate or incomplete information, with the promise of incorporating their feedback into the final draft in the spirit of maintaining a constructive dialogue throughout this process while pursuing this advocacy initiative in a professional manner.

Call to Action: Sign the Petition

If you share these concerns about fairness, inclusivity, and consistency at the IACR, we invite you to:

1. Read the Petition: View the original petition.
2. Sign or Publicly Endorse: Add your name, affiliation, or both.
3. Share Your View with the Board: Email the IACR Board to emphasize the need for impartial and transparent governance.
4. Spread the Word: Forward this site (IACRBias.org) to colleagues who care about equitable treatment within our field.

Thank you for your time and attention. We hope a transparent dialogue helps safeguard the inclusivity and fairness that the IACR community deserves.