Cypherpunks, keep your powder dry....
Here's a post that pretty much confirms that Dorothy Denning is leaning toward schemes that outlaw competitors to Skipjack. She continues to be the chief "Floater of Trial Balloons" (either that, or she's awfully prescient) and I would suggest anything she says about possible bans or restrictions on crypto that competes with Skipjack be taken very seriously. I'm trying not to be catty about Prof. Denning (even though I slipped up a while back and called her "the wicked witch of the East"), but I'm beginning to think we can automatically replace all occurrences of her name with "According to a senior Administration official..." Anyway, here it is: Newsgroups: alt.privacy.clipper Path: netcom.com!csus.edu!decwrl!decwrl!olivea!uunet!noc.near.net!chpc.chpc.org!rboudrie From: rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) Subject: Clipper article Message-ID: <1993Aug5.043923.4353@chpc.org> Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1993 04:39:23 GMT Lines: 16 The August 1993 issue of Security Management (American Society for Industrial Security) has a one page article on Clipper entitled "The Clipper Chip Debate" by Lisa Arbetter. The article goes over a few of the issues discussed in this group, and includes the following : She also conclused that getting criminals to use the system will be a problem. As a solution, Denning suggests legislation tlat places some constraints on the use of other products. This would force them to come up with their own solutions, costing them time and money that they might not be willing to sacrifice, she explains.m --
She also conclused that getting criminals to use the system will be a problem. As a solution, Denning suggests legislation tlat places some constraints on the use of other products. This would force them to come up with their own solutions, costing them time and money that they might not be willing to sacrifice, she explains.m
Nonsense. I can already see a market, either black, gray, or otherwise, for non-Clipper/Skipjack devices. In fact, I'd REALLY be surprised if people haven't already come up with them on their own. How hard could it be to throw together an 80386-based embedded system, put PGP in ROM, add a couple of A/D converters, and *presto* - instant privacy. Add table lookup (programmable from the phone pad, of course, based on the number dialed) and you've got a pretty decent PEP (privacy-enhanced phone) :) -- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@apple.com 510/659-9560 anon-2133@twwells.com If you want magic, let go of your armor. Magic is so much stronger than steel! -- Richard Bach, "The Bridge Across Forever"
Ed Carp writes:
She also conclused that getting criminals to use the system will be a problem. As a solution, Denning suggests legislation tlat places some constraints on the use of other products. This would force them to come up with their own solutions, costing them time and money that they might not be willing to sacrifice, she explains.m
Nonsense. I can already see a market, either black, gray, or otherwise, for non-Clipper/Skipjack devices. In fact, I'd REALLY be surprised if people haven't already come up with them on their own. How hard could it be to throw together an 80386-based embedded system, put PGP in ROM, add a couple of A/D converters, and *presto* - instant privacy. Add table lookup (programmable from the phone pad, of course, based on the number dialed) and you've got a pretty decent PEP (privacy-enhanced phone) :)
At the risk of stating the obvious, I think it is precisely schemes like this that Denning was referring to. These are what she wants to target. Several groups have proposed crypto phones, most using CELP and SoundBlaster-type cards for PCs. Recall that the Cypherpunks in Silicon Valley, Washington, D.C., and Boston/Cambridge linked up with encrypted audio links (albeit briefly). Such things are possible, for sure. But as "street corner drug dealers" start to use encryption (it could happen...the "phase changes" to beepers and cellular phones happened in a matter of months), there will be calls for restrictions to "keep "unbreakable codes' out of the hands of criminals and terrorists. As several others have noted, various nonlegislative measures can be used....requirements for certification of all "devices" attached to phone lines might be one such measure (never mind the futility of enforcement). The ban on using crypto in ham radio transmissions is illustrative. If Denning and her associates are already talking about the need to make non-Clipper use more difficult (read: outlawed), then it is likely the legislation is already being drawn up in some form. -Tim -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.
Ed Carp writes:
She also conclused that getting criminals to use the system will be a problem. As a solution, Denning suggests legislation tlat places some constraints on the use of other products. This would force them to come up with their own solutions, costing them time and money that they might not be willing to sacrifice, she explains.m
Nonsense. I can already see a market, either black, gray, or otherwise, for non-Clipper/Skipjack devices. In fact, I'd REALLY be surprised if people haven't already come up with them on their own. How hard could it be to throw together an 80386-based embedded system, put PGP in ROM, add a couple of A/D converters, and *presto* - instant privacy. Add table lookup (programmable from the phone pad, of course, based on the number dialed) and you've got a pretty decent PEP (privacy-enhanced phone) :)
At the risk of stating the obvious, I think it is precisely schemes like this that Denning was referring to. These are what she wants to target.
My apologies - I guess I wasn't clear. Waht I meant was, does she honestly think that people *won't* do what I suggested, just because there are laws forbidding it? If she does, she is surely living in a dreamworld.
Several groups have proposed crypto phones, most using CELP and SoundBlaster-type cards for PCs. Recall that the Cypherpunks in Silicon Valley, Washington, D.C., and Boston/Cambridge linked up with encrypted audio links (albeit briefly). Such things are possible, for sure.
Not to mention the infamous 'netphone' :)
But as "street corner drug dealers" start to use encryption (it could happen...the "phase changes" to beepers and cellular phones happened in a matter of months), there will be calls for restrictions to "keep "unbreakable codes' out of the hands of criminals and terrorists.
At the risk of stating the obvious: I think 'could' can very probably be changed to '*will*'. So, how are they going to keep '"unbreakable codes' out of the hands of criminals and terrorists'? Laws are obeyed by the 99% of society who are law-abiding (generally speaking, that is), yet laws are made targeting the 1% of the population who couldn't care less.
As several others have noted, various nonlegislative measures can be used....requirements for certification of all "devices" attached to phone lines might be one such measure (never mind the futility of enforcement). The ban on using crypto in ham radio transmissions is illustrative.
Yes, but remember, most hams are law-abiding, since a ham radio license is not a right.
If Denning and her associates are already talking about the need to make non-Clipper use more difficult (read: outlawed), then it is likely the legislation is already being drawn up in some form.
Of course it is! But that won't stop anyone but the DAvid Sternlights of the world from using crypto. Can't the folks in DC plainly *see* that?? Time to go to bed - I've got an 11 AM interview. Anyone know of any sysadmin contracts out there?? :) -- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@apple.com 510/659-9560 anon-2133@twwells.com If you want magic, let go of your armor. Magic is so much stronger than steel! -- Richard Bach, "The Bridge Across Forever"
Tim May writes:
Here's a post that pretty much confirms that Dorothy Denning is leaning toward schemes that outlaw competitors to Skipjack.
Dorothy said as much to me even before Clipper was announced. I think she would have no problem with my representing her here as being highly concerned that widespread powerful encryption (other than key-escrow encryption) poses a threat to the enforcement of the laws and the maintenance of public order. --Mike
Tim May writes:
Here's a post that pretty much confirms that Dorothy Denning is leaning toward schemes that outlaw competitors to Skipjack.
Dorothy said as much to me even before Clipper was announced. I think she would have no problem with my representing her here as being highly concerned that widespread powerful encryption (other than key-escrow encryption) poses a threat to the enforcement of the laws and the maintenance of public order.
I think attitudes like Denning's pose a threat to the enforcement of the bill of rights and the maintenance of public freedom. People should be able to keep their business private, without the government meddling. I'll bet Jefferson and Paine are both spinning in their graves. Of course, Hamilton would probably like Denning's ideas - he always was a bit of a busy-body... -- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@apple.com 510/659-9560 anon-2133@twwells.com If you want magic, let go of your armor. Magic is so much stronger than steel! -- Richard Bach, "The Bridge Across Forever"
participants (3)
-
khijol!erc＠apple.com -
Mike Godwin -
tcmay＠netcom.com