Parker on Clipper

[John E. Kreznar]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> In the 21-Mar-94 issue of Computerworld p.4 the following statment is
> attributed to Donn Parker of SRI, "We have to make strong, nonescrow
> encryption a crime".  I do not remember Parker making a statement like
> this previously, is this a new position for Parker or is my memory 
> going bad?

He is quoted in the March issue of Scientific American as saying ``You
can't have absolute privacy.  A democracy just can't operate that way.''
(page 101)  The article goes on to say

	The question is not whether cyberspace will be subjected to
	legislation but rather ``how and when law and order will be
	imposed,'' Parker says.  He predicts that the current state of
	affairs will get much worse before the government steps in ``to
	assure privacy and to protect the rights people do have.''

I was so incensed that I began writing him a letter questioning this.  I
might have carried through, but I couldn't find an email address for him
right away.  (Anyone have it handy?)  His attitude reminds me of claims
by DERD & Co. (love that new designator! what does the R stand for?)
that ``if you knew what I know, you too would favor government
surveillance''.

You write almost as if you are surprised that he in particular would
express these positions.  I was unaware of his existence before reading
this Scientific American piece, so I had no preconceived notions.  Why
were you surprised?

	John E. Kreznar		| Relations among people to be by
	jkreznar at ininx.com	| mutual consent, or not at all.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLY+VbMDhz44ugybJAQHXXgP8CtmWmGKRtkH0NQP82BvEn2HKA4yETXGw
/1ztpQncJ/joInhIacuuGYLuPqf3q4ahBRWBa4l2+KHvn2f5Epsb71i2DUsTt/DT
QQdxsUEX5DfeX4JFd0yVceYCkeC0Pd4yCXYlFy6xwl/HYgyQjtnx7F+97+XiWjNi
VHvXjZo26n8=
=ilkn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----