[5636] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
RE: more re Encryption Technology Limits Eased
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Declan McCullagh)
Fri Sep 17 10:04:17 1999
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 09:07:15 -0400
To: Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Cc: "Cryptography@C2. Net" <cryptography@c2.net>,
"cypherpunks@Algebra. COM" <cypherpunks@Algebra.COM>,
farber@cis.upenn.edu
In-Reply-To: <NDBBIFGOKODBCKDGJDKLOEPCCGAA.shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <19990917131153.HQXJ17922@alaptop.hotwired.com>
Lucky, actually not everyone missed it. It's our top story on Wired News
this morning.
http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/21810.html
Decoding the Crypto Policy Change
3:00 a.m. Why did the White House suddenly change its mind on
regulating encryption? It couldn't be because the NSA has
changed its spying agenda. Or could it? A Wired News
perspective by Declan McCullagh.
-Declan
At 23:07 9/16/1999 -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
>less operationally savvy. No, what I find interesting is that so far
>everybody missed the one paragraph in the announcement that actually offered
>new information about the USG's insidious objectives. [...]
>
>" Protect sensitive investigative techniques and industry trade secrets
> from unnecessary disclosure in litigation or criminal trials involving
> encryption, consistent with fully protecting defendants' rights to a
> fair trial."
>
>Having just read the proposed bill, what this paragraph refers to is that
>under the proposed bill, LE will be able to enter evidence gathered by means
>of factory-installed backdoors, intrusion, and other means without needing
>to disclose to the defense or the Jury how this evidence was obtained. All
