From the beginning, it has been clear to me that the whole thing about crypto export prohibitions enhancing national security is just a smoke screen. While there may be a germ of truth to those kinds of statements,
Jonathan Rochkind wrote: | Is anyone else distrubed by the way that encryption export policy and the | clipper chip seem to be linked {in administration policy, and in the | press? | ... If we need to prevent encryption export for national security | reasons, as the administration alleges, then that doesn't neccesarily | have any relation on whether we need to adopt key escrow too. the _real_ reason for propping export controls up when they are no longer effective, and no longer make sense, is to fragment the worldwide market and give weakened state-sponsored encryption a window of opportunity to become a standard. As such, I'm not upset at how the administration finally is publicly acknowledging their abuse of export control law for anti-democratic ends. I'm just upset at their abuse, and consider it highly unethical, even criminal. It's ironic that those who are engaging in these unethical, anti- democratic acts are also asking us to trust them with access to our most private conversations... Rich -- Loudyellnet: Richard Johnson | Sneakernet: ECNT1-6, CB 429, CU Boulder Phonenet: +1.303.492.0590 | Internet: Richard.Johnson@Colorado.EDU RIPEM and PGP public keys available by server, finger or request Speaker to avalanche dragons. Do you really think they listen?