----------------- Subject: USA Today/Freeh Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 09:08:05 -0400 From: Dave Banisar <banisar@epic.org> USA TODAY Our View September 26, 1997 Computer privacy at risk if FBI gets the codes Thinking about protecting your computer files with high-quality encryption? Well, act fast. The FBI is out to stop you. Not only will you get less security if the agency gets its way, but you'll pay more for software to protect your personal financial, medical and other records. Until now, restrictions on good encryption technology have covered only exports. But the agency wants to outlaw the making, sale and distribution here of all codes it can't break. It would require any firm offering such programs to hand decoding keys over to third parties so the FBI and other agencies could get hold of them without your knowledge. It's the electronic equivalent of demanding that Americans put copies of all their records in some federal depository. One House committee has passed the FBI plan. Another committee failed this week to insert it in a bill aimed at lifting export curbs. But more attempts are sure. The FBI says encryption controls are for your security. Otherwise, drug lords and terrorists can hide behind strong encryption to evade the law. In fact, lack of powerful encryption programs is leaving the vast majority of Americans far less secure. That's because of the existing restriction on exports. U.S. software and computer makers find it too costly to make one product for here and another for export. So, they don't provide the best encryption possible. The Justice Department reports computer security breaches cost U.S. business and consumers $ 7 billion a year. And domestic software and computer makers are losing sales to foreign firms. Estimated price tag by 2000: $ 60 billion a year, 240,000 jobs. Domestic limits would only add costs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that buyers will pay $ 5 to $ 10 more for software, up to $ 2 billion a year, to implement the FBI's system. And 11 of the world's top cryptographers in May warned that the FBI plan creates targets for criminals by establishing centers where billions of secrets are held. And for what? Smart crooks easily can evade police efforts by using unbreakable foreign encryption available over the Internet or by removing incriminating evidence by pressing their computer's delete key. The National Research Council, in an 18-month study for Congress, suggested a better course for government to meet everyone's security concerns: -- Provide law enforcement money to study surveillance alternatives. -- Ease the curb on encryption exports. -- Leave domestic encryption alone. In plain, unencrypted text: Don't stop Americans from protecting themselves. ---------------------------------------------- USA TODAY Let law keep weapons Louis J. Freeh In this time of electronic commerce, e-mail and private information routinely stored in computers, the availability of powerful encryption is essential. No one in law enforcement disputes that. All of law enforcement is also in total agreement on one aspect of encryption: The widespread use of uncrackable encryption will devastate our ability to fight crime and prevent terrorism. It will render two of our most important investigative techniques, court-ordered electronic surveillance and search and seizure, a nullity in many instances. Without a balanced approach that accommodates commercial interests, privacy and public safety concerns, criminals and terrorists will be able to shield themselves from court orders used to obtain critical evidence and prevent the worst crimes. How important are the techniques? Law enforcement used electronic surveillance to disrupt terrorists mixing bombs to blow up buildings and assassinate political figures. A computer was used to store evidence of a plot to blow up 11 U.S. airline flights. Police use electronic surveillance to combat drugs, gang violence and kidnapping. Indeed, state and local law enforcement authorities account for 50% of all the electronic surveillance court orders in the United States. These are what will be lost if, despite valid court orders, law enforcement is unable to decrypt that which criminals have encrypted. We are not asking that advances in encryption be abandoned or that privacy rights be threatened. Nor are we asking for any increase in law enforcement's authority to intercept people's conversations. We only ask that the careful balance of the Fourth Amendment not be inadvertently tipped in favor of criminals and terrorists in the rush to satisfy the marketplace. Many companies are urging Congress to let them determine the extent to which public safety is protected and have expressed a desire that government be more sympathetic to their commercial needs. These potential life-and-death issues are too important to leave solely to market forces that respond to important but unrelated interests. Good and sound public policy decisions must be made now by Congress. We remain hopeful that, as legislation is crafted, it will not ignore the pleas of law enforcement but instead will preserve that careful balance that has been so meticulously maintained for the past 200 years. Louis J. Freeh is director of the FBI. ------------------------- Declan McCullagh Time Inc. The Netly News Network Washington Correspondent http://netlynews.com/