[6224] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
FC: Armey asks for Fidnet privacy reassurances from Janet Reno
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (R. A. Hettinga)
Tue Dec 7 22:21:00 1999
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <v04220812b4736dad9740@[204.167.100.119]>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 21:06:51 -0500
To: cryptography@c2.net, dcsb@ai.mit.edu, cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
From: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah@shipwright.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 18:09:20 -0500
To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu
From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Subject: FC: Armey asks for Fidnet privacy reassurances from Janet Reno
Sender: owner-politech@vorlon.mit.edu
Reply-To: declan@well.com
**********
>December 6, 1999
>The Honorable Janet Reno, Attorney General
>US Department of Justice
>950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
>Washington, DC 20530-0001
>
>Dear Attorney General Reno,
>
> On September 27, I wrote to you seeking clarification of the
>Administration's policies regarding online privacy - specifically as related
>to encryption export controls and federal monitoring of online networks.
>Although I had asked for a response by October 15, I have still not received
>any answers to my questions.
>
>I have seen, however, the draft regulations released by the U.S. Department
>of Commerce on November 24. Unfortunately, they seem to fall short of the
>rhetoric employed when the new Administration position was announced. The
>rules seem overly prescriptive and excessively bureaucratic. Since these
>are only draft regulations, however, I am willing to reserve judgement until
>the rules are final. I urge you to take another look at the provisions of
>HR 850, the SAFE Act, when crafting the final version - the bill has
>overwhelming bipartisan support and was scheduled for floor action when the
>Administration announced it's reversal on encryption export policy.
>
>Online privacy issues, like encryption, need to be handled in an open and
>straightforward manner. As this Christmas shopping season has demonstrated,
>e-commerce is here to stay, but it will only continue to flourish if
>consumers have confidence that their online transactions are secure. The
>Administration cannot continue to unveil important online policy changes
>without adequate public vetting and explanation. A failure to communicate
>can lead to a lack of confidence in the online environment.
>
>This is particularly true with regard to network security issues. FIDNet,
>and other related computer network monitoring proposals, have raised many
>concerns about the federal government "cybersnooping" on online
>transactions. While I share the Administration's goal of protecting
>government computer networks from outside intruders, there are serious
>policy questions about how best to achieve security in a way that protects
>personal privacy.
>
>The few answers that have been forthcoming are often vague and even
>contradictory. For example, your September 24 letter states "As envisioned,
>FIDNet is being designed to monitor federal executive branch computer
>networks for intrusions, not private networks or the Internet in general."
>Yet National Journal's Tech Daily reported on October 20 that "The
>Department of Justice is cultivating controversial plans to avoid or repeal
>portions of the Freedom of Information Act because of concerns the law might
>keep businesses from playing a crucial role in the Clinton Administration's
>computer network security plans."
>
>Is this article accurate? If there is no private sector role in the
>"National Plan," why would FOIA have to be waived? Or was your answer to my
>initial letter simply that FIDNet itself is not designed to monitor private
>networks, but that other components of the Administration's network security
>plan will involve private networks?
>
>I feel very strongly that Congress should not authorize or appropriate any
>funds to implement the "National Plan," until the details of the plan are
>carefully scrutinized and debated by the Congress and the public at-large.
>Congress will not put the confidence of the American people in their online
>transactions at risk by prematurely supporting a plan that has not yet seen
>the light of day. I hope you will take this opportunity to reassure the
>public that there is no Administration effort to invade personal privacy
>before releasing the "National Plan" later this year.
>
>The American people will not simply "trust" that the Justice Department,
>which allowed 900 FBI files containing personal information about American
>citizens to be released into unauthorized hands (i.e. Craig Livingstone),
>will be more careful with their online privacy.
>
>People are very interested in preserving their personal security online.
>The future of e-commerce depends on it. I urge you to work with Congress to
>bring these important Internet privacy issues to the forefront where they
>can be openly discussed and debated before the public. I am certain that
>the Administration shares our commitment to online privacy. Please take
>this opportunity to demonstrate it by providing more clarity and light to
>the encryption export rules and the FIDNet proposals.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> DICK ARMEY
> House Majority Leader
>
>Cc: Secretary of Commerce, William M. Daley
>Secretary of Defense, William S. Cohen
> National Security Adviser, Samuel R. Berger
>Chief Counselor for Privacy at OMB, Peter Swire
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe: send a message to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu with this text:
subscribe politech
More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- end forwarded text
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
