At 5:43 PM -0800 4/2/97, Timothy C. May wrote:
However, key recovery need have no "hooks" by government into it. The attempt by the government to ensure secret access, without even so much as a search warrant, is revealing.
This issue is to me key. If the government wants any creditability on the GAK issue, it will include in any GAK system, a provision for independent auditing, after the fact, of intercepts. (BTW - I will still oppose GAK, but some of my best arguments will be taken away.) It seems to me that once you swollen the idea that government has, under any circumstances, a right to read your mail, there are two issues. (1) Is the proscribed procedure fair? (2) Did the government follow the procedure? (My opposition to GAK is based on my belief that there are no star chamber proceedings which are fair. The ability to confront the witnesses against you and compel witnesses to testify for you are key here.) However, auditing only addresses the second issue. There are many problems with auditing the government's use of its access. One key one is, who is the auditor? At CFP97, I suggested that the press would make a good auditor. If the KRAP agency is truly at arms length from the government*, then a report of the keys released compared with records that the procedures were followed, would allow anyone, the press included, to check that the government followed the procedures. Now, I frequently think that the press is in bed with the government, so I am looking for a better auditor. Some institution which values its reputation more than it values its relationship with the government would do. Anyone have any good candidates? * Assuring this arms length relationship is an exercise for the student. (I give it a Knuth grade of 50.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | I have taken a real job at | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | Electric Communities as a | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz@netcom.com | capability security guru. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA