I was the one who asked Freeh the question, after he gave a talk at the conference on Global Cryptography. I said that while the administration is currently saying that they are not interested in regulating cryptography domestically, what if in the future the wiretaps you get yield scrambled messages that you can't decipher. (Meaning, do you regulate then?) Freeh asked, "In terms of encryption being a voluntary standard?" "Yes," I said. "Oh yeah, definitely," he said. "If five years from now we solved the access problem, but what we're hearing is all encrypted, I'll probably, if I'm still here, be talking about that in a very different way; the objective is the same. The objective is for us to get those conversations whether they're by an alligator clip or ones and zeros. Wherever they are, whatever they are, I need them." On Mon, 12 Dec 1994, L. McCarthy wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Can anyone point me to a source of verbatim quotations of Louis Freeh's now- legendary comments about the possibilities of banning unapproved cryptography ? All I have been able to find thus far are vague paraphrases. Thanks.

- - -L. Futplex McCarthy

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1

iQCVAwUBLuwh+2f7YYibNzjpAQHp+wP9F2tGTtTYg+QRlDQVkrgfQh6YSbKRXNW1 OJX22BcuhAFsMX1LUTZQ5unYiwXi8pu9jdyeCV5nGU/PSKO3noSEunBFlSPCm0nm yW5UEiWGWjRuDUJNEEB81W9KVdB8JPvTgsBANv4skQpT8pNPumQz54uPvEaFJ8O3 bt+zxTB6dc8= =ATOv - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service

iQBFAwUBLuwjSCoZzwIn1bdtAQFs5wF/c6t636S1GnUKygE2/UBJGwyoSnubAYJ6 5+Ck9KIrIavZ7n/7qLWhYX+7jp8Xkq54 =MM0m -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----