Ulf Moeller[SMTP:um@c2.net] wrote:
Can you imagine that anyone would ever create a program that tries to look like a conforming implementation, but generates invalid "binding" data -- when it is so much easier to simply use PGP, and (if necessary) disguise that fact using the government-approved encryption software? I don't, so in my opinion the verification process is abolutely useless. Can you imagine what would happen if governments would (help to) set up = a system that has no safeguards at all, i.e. that could give criminals =
You mean like Cash? The (in the US) green stuff that can be transfered with _no_ ID? That you can use to go down to the local convience store and get a money order with to send across state lines thru the US mail? Nah. Can't imagine what would happen with something like that.
all the anonimity and confidentiality they need? Governments can't = probably prevent criminals and the like to use encryption to stay out of =
You could have stopped before the "and".
don't want TRP at all. The bottom line is that law-abiding citizens = always have to give up some of their freedom to stop criminals (that is =
No, you DON'T have to. Laws make criminals, and Laws restrict freedom. Any law put into place to _prevent_ crime actually does the opposite. In what, 1907? Congress criminalized certain drugs (canabis & cocaine and some others) what was previously legal became a crime, and it's practicioners criminals. If Congress criminalizes Crypto, I and others on this list will become criminals. We will _become_ criminals to "stop" crime, and others will give up their freedom to "stop" us from commiting "criminal" acts. Your biggest fallacy (vis a vis crypto) is that criminals will _follow_ the law. They won't by defination, execpt as needed for their schemes. That is why they are called criminals, because the commit CRIMES, not because they follow the law.
why you have to have registration plates on your car, a lock on your = car, bicycle, house etc.). That is a fact of life; one I hate. So the =
The lock is there to stop criminals. The registration _plate_ is there to allow the government to collect Taxes, and track people. There are serial numbers on cars used in theft _recovery_ rather than theft prevention.
Cryptopolicy is not a binary discussion; although some posters on this = list seem to think so.
The middle is defined by the extremes. I'd take the most extreme possible stance, execpt that it is where I already stand, that the government is an _barely_ necessary evil, and needs to be made an unnecessary evil ASAP.
You are absolutely right. However, as said above if governments (help = to) set up a security system then they should at least attempt to make = criminal abuse difficult. The lock on my bicycle is not really 100% = either (as I found out quite to often); if I'd no lock at all I would = have a lot more problems. Also, I am *not* for a mandatory system.
If you had _no_ lock at all, and locks weren't avaiable, guess what? Your bike would get stolen _less_ often because you wouldn't let it out of your sight (well, I wouldn't let _mine_, but I spent a LOT of money (for me) on mine, so...) And no, a lock isn't 100%. Nothing man made is. Nothing natural is. Ask yourself this, given a foe with more resources than you, can you keep him _out_ of a given computer system? Not totally. Petro, Christopher C. petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff> snow@smoke.suba.com