Mike McNally writes:
The point being that dropping an IDEA chip in is not 'plug and play'.
I believe this; my point was simply to clarify. I interpreted Tim's note as having to do with reverse-engineering Clipper, while the original note seemed more along the "plug and play" lines. Now that I think about it, it's probably the case the Tim didn't misunderstand at all, but was on a tack about how you'd pretty much have to completely re-engineer the thing. Or something.
Good summary. I miss have missed the subtleties the original poster (DrZaphod, as I recall) was making, about only a partial emulation. I had assumed the idea was to defeat the Clipper proposal by substituting a chip either not implementing all Clipper features (notably, key escrow) or different in some other way. "Socket compatible" is more than just matching up some voltages on some pins, etc. The new chip must of course operate with the software of the Clipperphone, or the jig is up and there's no point in even dropping in a new chip! This was, as Mike correctly notes, the starting point for my analysis. If the new chip does not even work with the Clipper software, does not behave like a real Clipper chip would, what's the point? Surely the Clipperphones will not be bought and then modified because they are "cheap." And if we do our job, they will not be _ubiquitous_ either. Some of the plans underway for Soundblaster card-based voice encryption (probably using CELP on a fast 486 machine, or faster) seem more rewarding.
Seems like it'd be easier to compete with Clipper by simply building an alternative from the ground up.
Yep. --Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power:2**859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.