Jim Miller writes:

That brings up an issue I occasionally think about...At what point does NSA's secrecy become more of a liability than an asset. Should the NSA reveal flaws in crypto-systems in wide use here in the US to protect US companies and individuals from attack or should they remain quite so they can exploit them in the interests of national security?

As usual, I speak at most for myself. But I think it's pretty safe to say that most people here believe the privacy interests of individuals (and companies) outweigh the allegedly conflicting "national security" interests of the countries in which we reside. A great deal has been written (more eloquently) on this point. The NSA doubtless believes it has a "national security" interest in knowing the contents of my communications with my very good friend in the USAF. I strenuously disagree. This is one of the reasons I devote so much of my time to, er, cypherpunking :) (It has also been noted by many before me that preserving the privacy of U.S. entities is a significant national security interest in and of itself.) -Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com> "The guys in the powdered wigs had it about right in 1792, and there's good reason why in 200-plus years we have not amended the Bill of Rights, which is what this legislation would do." -White House Press Secretary Michael D. McCurry, commenting on the Administration's position on the proposed flag desecration amendment to the U.S. Constitution