More on House Intelligence committee amendment on crypto
So I'm reading through the 43-page amendment to SAFE that the House Intelligence committee approved today. It includes: * Ban on sale of crypto without a backdoor. Five year & fine (maybe $250,000?) if violated. Prosecutions can be held in closed-door courtrooms, publishers of info about case to be held in contempt of court. * Federal government computer purchases must use key escrow "immediate decryption" after 1998. Same with network established w/Federal funds. * Such products can be labeled "authorized for sale to U.S. government" * U.S. government may "not mandate the use of encryption standards" for the private sector * Export decisions aren't subject to judicial review * Defense & Commerce have controls of exports of crypto * Establishes Encryption Industry and Information Security Board * Internet providers, key recovery centers aren't liable if they turn over keys following legal standards * President can negotiate int'l agreements, perhaps punish noncompliant governments I'm still reading... More details shortly... -Declan
Declan McCullagh wrote:
So I'm reading through the 43-page amendment to SAFE that the House Intelligence committee approved today. It includes:
* Ban on sale of crypto without a backdoor. Five year & fine (maybe $250,000?) if violated. Prosecutions can be held in closed-door courtrooms, publishers of info about case to be held in contempt of court.
How about a ban on sale of Congressional votes without using vaseline on the citizen's backdoor? World's Greatest Search Engine? It's the one that finds the names of the Justice Department officials who went to jail for contempt of court when they defied Congress during the INSLAW hearings. TruthMonger
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <Pine.GSO.3.95.970911152027.12105Z-100000@well.com>, on 09/11/97 at 03:38 PM, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:
So I'm reading through the 43-page amendment to SAFE that the House Intelligence committee approved today. It includes:
* Ban on sale of crypto without a backdoor. Five year & fine (maybe $250,000?) if violated. Prosecutions can be held in closed-door courtrooms, publishers of info about case to be held in contempt of court.
* Federal government computer purchases must use key escrow "immediate decryption" after 1998. Same with network established w/Federal funds.
* Such products can be labeled "authorized for sale to U.S. government"
* U.S. government may "not mandate the use of encryption standards" for the private sector
* Export decisions aren't subject to judicial review
* Defense & Commerce have controls of exports of crypto
* Establishes Encryption Industry and Information Security Board
* Internet providers, key recovery centers aren't liable if they turn over keys following legal standards
* President can negotiate int'l agreements, perhaps punish noncompliant governments
I'm still reading... More details shortly...
-Declan
Declan, Is there any way you can get me a copy of the amendment? My congressman is on that committie and I intend to raise a stink down here on this. Copies of the transcripts from the meeting and voting recored would be helpfull. I understand that 1 congresscritter voted against the amendment, do you know which one it was? I would like to make sure it wasn't Joe Scarborough. Thanks, - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNBibN49Co1n+aLhhAQHjIAQAt8zHf0pXV0ADED/nsurOOu78TOC9WyVh hiK+Ido+h2gbyI/IM+kYjqFX1Mmnw33u2HcPQgBWY1wOaZDHbE1s7bumkD2hkKAM Cu8kH4BC2G4yi5pR7S9d+4QwmnHNA+S5ptPdMtV0MwEgTy5c0Ht/Kya5qJZrZikp hZdGgNhdVv0= =3nSZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I understand that 1 congresscritter voted against the amendment, do you know which one it was? I would like to make sure it wasn't Joe Scarborough.
"Twas none other than Adam Smith - Rep. from Microsoft's own Puget sound. I saw his hand. Will Rodger Washington Bureau Chief Inter@ctive Week -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNBkmGtZgKT/Hvj9iEQL3ggCgwAzUMsqPgbt/0X4ux0LW1onPNIEAnjcR vSCY8TUImbNIt1eEyf1RrXWQ =Z8em -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
William, There was a vote in Nat Sec earlier this week. That was fortyfive-one, I recall, to gut SAFE. I think Smith voted against it. Today's vote was in the supersecret Intelligence committee, which met behind closed doors this morning and approved the domestic restrictions. -Declan
Is there any way you can get me a copy of the amendment? My congressman is on that committie and I intend to raise a stink down here on this.
Copies of the transcripts from the meeting and voting recored would be helpfull.
I understand that 1 congresscritter voted against the amendment, do you know which one it was? I would like to make sure it wasn't Joe Scarborough.
At 7:23 am -0400 on 9/12/97, Will Rodger wrote:
"Twas none other than Adam Smith - Rep. from Microsoft's own Puget sound. I saw his hand.
Ohhhh. I can see it now, 5 years hence: "Bill Gates was indicted for treason today by special order of President Gore. His vast ill-gotten fortune has been impounded under the RICO laws." Call me paranoid. Call me anything you want. Just don't call me late for supper. ;-). Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/
On Thu, 11 Sep 1997 15:38:30 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
So I'm reading through the 43-page amendment to SAFE that the House Intelligence committee approved today. It includes:
* Ban on sale of crypto without a backdoor. Five year & fine (maybe $250,000?) if violated. Prosecutions can be held in closed-door courtrooms, publishers of info about case to be held in contempt of court.
* Federal government computer purchases must use key escrow "immediate decryption" after 1998. Same with network established w/Federal funds.
* Such products can be labeled "authorized for sale to U.S. government"
* U.S. government may "not mandate the use of encryption standards" for the private sector
* Export decisions aren't subject to judicial review
* Defense & Commerce have controls of exports of crypto
* Establishes Encryption Industry and Information Security Board
* Internet providers, key recovery centers aren't liable if they turn over keys following legal standards
* President can negotiate int'l agreements, perhaps punish noncompliant governments
I'm still reading... More details shortly...
-Declan
How can a law, or how it is applied be exempt from judicial review? If I understand the first amendment correctly, this is not legal. AMENDMENT I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Article III, section 2 of the Constitution states: 1. ***The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made under their authority***; to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party; [to controversies between two or more states, between a state and citizens of another state, between citizens of different states, between citizens of the same state, claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.] The 11th Amendment didn't change the part between the *'s. If this is correct, any law that Congress would make that prevented me from seeking judicial review would be unconstitutional. -Doug ------------------- Douglas L. Peterson mailto:fnorky@geocities.com http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Heights/1271/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <3422b46b.109964168@mail.geocities.com>, on 09/15/97 at 04:37 AM, fnorky@geocities.com (Douglas L. Peterson) said:
If this is correct, any law that Congress would make that prevented me from seeking judicial review would be unconstitutional.
The Constitution was repealed by the Communist Franklin "Dictator for Life" Roosevelt. The general public was never notified due to "national security". - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNB1Xs49Co1n+aLhhAQGDyQQAk6XuzKSAaTZWXeXG/MFLy0RhepyZYpg1 eFPOrDFtu3R0hCs2T1/g19rtoffRLhaVXgsBPYdzQhwomtJeEJnQW5s84bU6RScN aXzHR2Lm4S5CNq67Klt4oMInNt/bM8KHaILKNRuTzzn4uGg9XSHRVBo4SCpnYTMX SB/U5Xhb1wY= =ssCq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (7)
-
Declan McCullagh -
fnorky＠geocities.com -
Robert Hettinga -
TruthMonger -
Will Rodger -
William H. Geiger III -
William H. Geiger III