[52643] in Cypherpunks
Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary? (Was
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jim bell)
Tue Mar 26 01:07:14 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 21:11:41 -0800
To: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>,
"Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>
From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com, Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
At 08:14 AM 3/25/96 -0800, Simon Spero wrote:
>
>If the Leahy bill is unacceptable, what legistlation is necessary? I
>can't see how the use of cryptography in the commission of a crime needs
>to be a separate offence, but I could see how it could be treated as a
>special circumstance - that doesn't really needed a new law though.
>
>I do feel that it should be possible for courts to sub poena crypto keys,
>but that doesn't really need new law either
If you really believe that, then what happens when "they" argue that crypto
keys MUST be kept, because if they are not kept they can't be subpoenaed?
If a manufacturer proposes building a crypto telephone where no keys are
kept after they call ends, then it seems to me that he'd be accused of
thwarting some "right" to courts' access to keys.
If you disagree with this line of reasoning, then why did you say that last
line above? Read it carefully; remember, you wrote it.
Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com
