according to http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,10604,00.html Kerrey's effort has one thing in common with the SAFE Act: It calls for the creation of an Information Security Board. The board proposal caused some privacy watchdogs to pull their endorsements of SAFE because it wouldn't have to comply with federal open-meeting act. Since a common hand has presumably been at work in both bills, this looks like good cop / bad cop to me. The good cop says, "I am your friend" He is not your friend. Create a federal board, and it will exercise power. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
I believe Courtney got it wrong. Isn't it Pro-CODE that has the Info Board provision? See: SEC. 6. INFORMATION SECURITY BOARD. (a) INFORMATION SECURITY BOARD TO BE ESTABLISHED- The Secretary shall establish an Information Security Board comprised of representatives of agencies within the Federal Government responsible for or involved in the formulation of information security policy, including export controls on products with information security features (including encryption). The Board shall meet at such times and in such places as the Secretary may prescribe, but not less frequently than quarterly. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) does not apply to the Board or to meetings held by the Board under subsection (d). -Declan On Tue, 13 May 1997 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
according to http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,10604,00.html
Kerrey's effort has one thing in common with the SAFE Act: It calls for the creation of an Information Security Board. The board proposal caused some privacy watchdogs to pull their endorsements of SAFE because it wouldn't have to comply with federal open-meeting act.
Since a common hand has presumably been at work in both bills, this looks like good cop / bad cop to me.
The good cop says, "I am your friend"
He is not your friend.
Create a federal board, and it will exercise power.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
At 9:15 PM -0800 5/13/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
I believe Courtney got it wrong. Isn't it Pro-CODE that has the Info Board provision? See:
SEC. 6. INFORMATION SECURITY BOARD.
(a) INFORMATION SECURITY BOARD TO BE ESTABLISHED- The Secretary shall establish an Information Security Board comprised of representatives of agencies within the Federal Government responsible for or involved in the formulation of information security policy, including export controls on products with information security features (including encryption). The Board shall meet at such times and in such places as the Secretary may prescribe, but not less frequently than quarterly. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) does not apply to the Board or to meetings held by the Board under subsection (d).
That was what I recollected, vaguely. I haven't spent near as much time analyzing Pro-CODE as I did a couple of weeks ago with SAFE. People tell me Pro-CODE is not nearly as bad, but I remain skeptical. And certainly James Donald is basically right that _any_ provision for a "review board" is a disaster. Review boards mean bureaucracy, entrenched interests, and a wedge for denial of licensens. As to Conrad Burns himself, he seemd jovial and "conservative" at last summer's Stanford mini-conference. Conservative in the sense I like. But how will a Montana Republican like him respond when ultra-strong crypto is used to, say, import child porn undetectably from Denmark, where there standards of what is child porn differ from those of Montana? This is where the "Review Board" will get involved, and so on and so forth. No politician I know of will ever be a friend of crypto anarchy. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <v0300780aaf9f103e46dd@[207.167.93.63]>, on 05/14/97 at 12:53 AM, Tim May <tcmay@got.net> said:
No politician I know of will ever be a friend of crypto anarchy.
The only thing that polititions are ever a friend of is whatever cause is flaver-of-the-month supported by the mob & media. They all have the intestinal fortitude of a slug. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- 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. Finger whgiii@amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Taking the wind out of Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000 iQCVAwUBM3nyEI9Co1n+aLhhAQGF3QQAmHIpFFW3lGPzWb+gAd7TNWAmTX0eXNGs JtnB798cZWWs8KFkPXWphEvJy6vP58u8/2bMAI6WB977CjQmStJxRLwflNvNtLq3 GdYgn8CT7cmALJ+7pg7QinV26iwkAkT6kInNPcKNWsqyRv4XGOvvCadXlkegMGui RNAr4hlv6mU= =hEmI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (4)
-
Declan McCullagh -
jamesd＠echeque.com -
Tim May -
William H. Geiger III