To: cyberia-l@listserv.aol.com Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 01:01:59 -0400 From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu> Subject: Re: Mandatory key escrow bill text, backed by FBI This is shocking. For a legal analysis of why mandatory domestic key escrow would not (most likely) be constitutional for non-commercial messages, see parts III & IV of: http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/clipper.htm A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin@law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/ Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's hot here. ---------- Here's an excerpt from the June version of the Secure Public Networks Act (McCain-Kerrey Bill S.909), the revised draft bill now being circulated that Declan quoted: TITLE I - DOMESTIC USES OF ENCRYPTION SEC. 101. LAWFUL USE OF ENCRYPTION. Except as otherwise provided by this Act or otherwise provided by law, it shall be lawful for any person within any State to use any encryption, regardless of encryption algorithm selected, encryption key length chosen, or implementation technique or medium used. SEC. 102. PROHIBITION ON MANDATORY THIRD PARTY ESCROW OF KEYS USED FOR ENCRYPTION OF CERTAIN COMMUNICATIONS. Neither the Federal Government nor a State may require the escrow of an encryption key with a third party in the case of an encryption key used solely to encrypt communications between private persons within the United States. SEC. 103. VOLUNTARY PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION IN KEY MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE. The participation of the private persons in the key management infrastructure enabled by this Act is voluntary. ---------- For full text of the June version: http://jya.com/s909.htm