[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: US Congress already discussing bans on strong crypto (fwd)

I am very sorry about what happened in NY and Washington. But this is not
the way to ban the strong cripto. 

Turned off server - absolute security, I agree, but there must be other
ways. There will always be a bad guy who will find the way, and the only
way to keep up, is to improve all the time.

Best regards,

On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Darren Reed wrote:

> The key word below is "global".
> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html
>    Congress Mulls Stiff Crypto Laws
>    By Declan McCullagh (declan_(_at_)_wired_(_dot_)_com)
>    1:45 p.m. Sep. 13, 2001 PDT
>    WASHINGTON -- The encryption wars have begun.
>    For nearly a decade, privacy mavens have been worrying that a
>    terrorist attack could prompt Congress to ban
>    communications-scrambling products that frustrate both police wiretaps
>    and U.S. intelligence agencies.
>    Tuesday's catastrophe, which shed more blood on American soil than any
>    event since the Civil War, appears to have started that process.
>    Some politicians and defense hawks are warning that extremists such as
>    Osama bin Laden, who U.S. officials say is a crypto-aficionado and the
>    top suspect in Tuesday's attacks, enjoy unfettered access to
>    privacy-protecting software and hardware that render their
>    communications unintelligible to eavesdroppers.
>    In a floor speech on Thursday, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
>    called for a global prohibition on encryption products without
>    backdoors for government surveillance.
>    "This is something that we need international cooperation on and we
>    need to have movement on in order to get the information that allows
>    us to anticipate and prevent what occurred in New York and in
>    Washington," Gregg said, according to a copy of his remarks that an
>    aide provided.
>    President Clinton appointed an ambassador-rank official, David Aaron,
>    to try this approach, but eventually the administration abandoned the
>    project.
>    Gregg said encryption makers "have as much at risk as we have at risk
>    as a nation, and they should understand that as a matter of
>    citizenship, they have an obligation" to include decryption methods
>    for government agents. Gregg, who previously headed the appropriations
>    subcommittee overseeing the Justice Department, said that such access
>    would only take place with "court oversight."
>    [...]
>    Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, a hawkish think tank
>    that has won accolades from all recent Republican presidents, says
>    that this week's terrorist attacks demonstrate the government must be
>    able to penetrate communications it intercepts.
>    "I'm certainly of the view that we need to let the U.S. government
>    have access to encrypted material under appropriate circumstances and
>    regulations," says Gaffney, an assistant secretary of defense under
>    President Reagan.
>    [...]