[116942] in Cypherpunks
Re: Project: Hardening Crypto Against Big Brother's "Black Bag"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (steve bryan)
Tue Aug 24 03:28:12 1999
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <v04210105b3e751195079@[204.1.1.99]>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.4.10.9908231243570.27203-100000@cavern.uark.edu>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 15:39:40 -0500
To: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu>
From: steve bryan <sbryan@vendorsystems.com>
Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Reply-To: steve bryan <sbryan@vendorsystems.com>
I've been too lazy to offer my own reaction which is also not as
negative as the prevailing opinions. There are some definite
unacceptable aspects to the proposal but I still think it can be
viewed as a step in the right direction. There are people engaged in
evil activities and I don't object to efforts made to thwart those
activities including the cryptographic equivalent of obtaining a
search warrant. In fact it is exactly the sort of thing I'd suggest
to someone who complains that law enforcement needs to have the
ability to routinely monitor all communications (ie restrict or
prohibit strong cryptography). Even if citizens routinely have their
affairs completely inaccessible from snoops of every variety I expect
sufficient competence to be exercised to overcome such measures when
the situation is not routine.
>No way. I'm thinking aboput the problem from the lawyer's point
>of view, and don't particularly like the result I'm getting. I
>thought a different viewpoint(s) would help me get to a conclusion
>I like better.
>Mac
>
>On Sat, 21 Aug 1999, Tim May wrote:
>
> > At 9:01 PM -0700 1999-08-21, Mac Norton wrote:
> > >Oh, come on. What's the difference in this stuff and a wiretap?
> > >Your crypto's strong, or it's not, right?
> > >MacN
> >
> > ???
> >
> >
> > Is this a troll?
