Subject: Re: BOYCOTT AT&T Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 20:07:37 -0400 Reply-To: cyber1@io.org In-Reply-To: <199405131541.IAA24220@well.sf.ca.us> Lines: 40
sure it didn't hurt. In the May 13 New York Times:
>The AT&T Corporation's winning bid for a $4 billion contract to >modernize Saudi Arabia's phone system ,WHICH HAD BEEN SUPPORTED >BY HEAVY CLINTON ADMINISTRATION LOBBYING , was hundreds of >millions of dollars higher than other bids [...] The huge-scale
In a column written for the Toronto Sun today, former Canadian Defense Minister Perrin Beatty went on record as opposing the Clipper chip. His reasoning: "1) American policy can't apply around the world, and foreign companies will build equipment without the chip. Criminals will have ready access to scramblers without trap doors. 2) The code the chip inserts makes it easier to identify information from a particular source. Instead of simply being part of a computerized stew, each piece of data is more recognizable and can be readily decrypted by the electronic key. 3) If Canadian industry must include the chip in products sold in the U.S. and Canada, it will lose business to less buggable equipment from Asia or Europe. 4) The chip could open our diplomatic and commercial secrets to U.S. snooping. The Americans are our best friends and our interests are usually similar. But shouldn't we at least be cautious? 5) The requirement for a court order is fine if procedures are followed and no one breaches security, but what if the system breaks down? Should we rely on only one means of protection?" ..................................................................... My comments: Canada used to have that Saudi Arabia contract, so there may be some economics involved. On the other hand, Mr. Beatty is especially well informed and has shown an interest in privacy issues for some time. -- Alex Brock