Does anyone how to get a copy of the report on "privacy enhancing technologies - the path to anonymity" cited in this paper from the Canberra/OECD conference on Feb 7-8: http://www.nla.gov.au/gii/oconnor.html Issues Facing Government : Meeting Public Concerns Kevin O'Connor Privacy Commissioner, Australia [Giant snip] In my own sphere of activity, there is some discussion taking place over the potential of new technologies and applications to assist with privacy protection. A recent report from the Dutch and Ontario Privacy Commissioners entitled Privacy enhancing technologies - the path to anonymity, offers some intriguing suggestions about the potential of public key cryptography for use in digital signatures to act as 'identity protectors' - allowing transactions to be completed and accounted for without the true identity of the participants needing to be known. While there are some obvious concerns about such technologies from a law enforcement perspective, which we have already heard about from the previous speaker, these should not be insuperable obstacles. On the other hand, the registration of digital signatures and public keys, with sufficient integrity to gain commercial and governmental confidence, itself raises additional privacy concerns. The complex issues involved are only just starting to be addressed. ... ----- Encouragingly, another paper by Matthew Bowcock http://www.nla.gov.au/gii/bowcock.html states: [Big snip] Controls on Encryption Technology There has been much heated debate worldwide about restrictions on the use of encryption technology, so that law enforcement and national security agencies can continue to intercept communications. Two questions are worth asking in this debate. Firstly, is interception of private communications a governmental right, which must therefore be protected in the face of technological change, or is it an accidental consequence of the weaknesses of the communication techniques that we have been using? I would argue that it is the latter and that there is no community obligation to protect it. Secondly, is a country better served by a vibrant, efficient, electronic economy, using trusted secure communication techniques for its day to day business, or by attempting to reduce organised crime by restricting use of technology? So far, much of the opposition to restrictions on the use of encryption technology has centred around a right to privacy and civil libertarian issues. Perhaps, instead, we need to quantify the opportunity cost, in economic terms, of delayed and lower levels of adoption of electronic commerce by the business community because the security mechanisms are not sufficiently trustworthy. It may be that the cost to the economy of restricting the use of encryption technology outweighs the benefits to the community. ...