In <3.0.1.32.19971017124121.0069d8d0@mail.cruzio.com>, on 10/17/97
at 12, Roger Schlafly
How can he say this with a straight face?
In fact, what we proposed requires two orders from a judge before we proceed, not just one as now required.
The DOJ proposal, sect 302, says:
(A) A Key Recovery Agent, whether or not registered by the Secretary under this Act, shall disclose recovery information stored by a person: (1) ...; or (2) to a law enforcement or national security government agency upon receipt of written authorization in a form to be specified by the Attorney General.
It also contradicts his final sentence:
... some workable solution can be found to insure that law enforcement can gain immediate access to the plaintext of encrypted criminal communication or electronic data that we have lawfully seized.
The term "immediate access" means without having to goto a judge.
I find the term "encrypted criminal communication" rather intresting. Exactly how does on know if a certian communication is crimminal unless one decrypts it and reads it?? Or is this yet another example of "guilty until we are forced to admit that you are not" type of logic followed by the LEA's in this country. Quote of the Day: "Happiness is seeing Louis Freeh's picture on a milk carton" -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html ---------------------------------------------------------------