From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@access.digex.net> The administration has said time and again that it will not force key escrow on manufacturers and companies in the private sector. In a Catch-22 response, critics then insist that if key escrow isn't mandated it won't work.
Again, this presupposes a trust in government. If you look at the words in the original announcements, this is NOT what the government says either. They insist that their program will be voluntary, and there are "currently no plans" to enforce a ban on other encryption.
Hey, don't let him off this easily. The administration *has* proposed banning strong encryption. They are now soft-pedaling this. IMHO, the single worst aspect of `Clipper' is that it creates an environment within which such a ban is more palatable. "All citizens have encryption available to them, readable only by authorized Peace Officers. So restrictions on non-Clipper encryption only harm child molestors and drug kingpins. You're not a child molestor or a drug kingpin, are you?" Cites on banning encryption:
From the original announcement, 16 April 1993: |Q: If the Administration were unable to find a technological |solution like the one proposed, would the Administration be willing |to use legal remedies to restrict access to more powerful encryption |devices? |A: This is a fundamental policy question which will be considered |during the broad policy review. [ed.: this review has since been |scuttled] ... [the U.S. is not saying] that `every American, as a |matter of right, is entitled to an unbreakable commercial encryption |product.' ...
Washington Times, 17 April 1993, "Government picks affordable chip to scramble phone calls": |An administration official said consideration will be given to |banning more sophisticated systems investigators cannot crack, |thereby creating a balance between banning private encryption and |declaring a public right to unbreakable coded communications. Washington Post, 30 May 1993, "Chipping Away At Privacy?", pages H1, H4: |Administration sources say that if the current plan doesn't enable |the NSA and FBI to keep on top of the technology, then Clinton is |prepared to introduce legislation to require use of its encryption |technology, which is crackable by the NSA, and to ban use of the |uncrackable gear. | |"It's an option on the table," said a White House official. Network World, 7 June 1993, p. 6: |NIST Deputy Director Ray Kammer said the government is considering |banning all other encryption and making Clipper Chip mandatory. (no context for this quote; take it for what it's worth) Eli ebrandt@hmc.edu