13 July 1997
Source: Mail list cypherpunks@toad.com
Thanks to Bill Stafford and Robert Hettinga

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 08:58:20 -0400
To: espam@intertrader.com, e$pam <e$pam@atanda.com>
From: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Subject: Encryption: editoral by IBD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
This mail is brought to you by the e$pam mailing list
---------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Bill GL Stafford <springco@arn.net>
To: "dcsb@ai.mit.edu" <dcsb@ai.mit.edu>
Subject: Encryption: editoral by IBD

 I believe these guys are on our side.
 Bill GL Stafford

 <http://www.investors.com/web_edition/today/viewfrontpage.html>

 Encryption: Keep Feds' Nose Out Of The Net

 ASHCROFT J.

 John Ashcroft is a Republican U.S. senator from Missouri and a member 
 of the Senate Commerce Committee.


 Date: 7/11/97

 Edgar Hoover would have loved this. The Clinton administration wants 
 government to be able to read international computer communications - 
 financial transactions, personal e-mail and proprietary information
 sent abroad - all in the name of national security.

 In a proposal that raises obvious concerns about Americans' privacy, 
 President Clinton wants to give agencies the keys for decoding all 
 exported U.S. software and Internet communications. Such a policy also
 would tamper with the competitive advantage that our U.S. software
 companies currently enjoy in the field of encryption technology.

 Not only would Big Brother be looming over the shoulders of 
 international cybersurfers, he also threatens to render our 
 state-of-the-art computer  software engineers obsolete and unemployed.

 Granted, the Internet could be used to commit crimes, and advanced 
 encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide 
 the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. 
 Why, then, should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen 
 at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?

 The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection 
 from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value.

 The president has proposed that American companies and computer users 
 supply the government with decryption keys to high-level encryption 
 programs. Yet European software producers are free to produce computer 
 encryption codes of all levels of security without providing keys to any 
 government authority.

 Buyers of encryption software value security above all else. They will 
 ultimately choose airtight encryption programs - not those for which the 
 U.S. government maintains keys.

 In spite of this obvious fact, the president is trying to foist his rigid 
 policy on the exceptionally fluid and fast-paced computer industry. 
 Furthermore, recent developments in decryption technology cast doubt on 
 the wisdom of any government meddling in this  industry.

 Two weeks ago, the 56-bit algorithm government standard encryption code 
 that protects most U.S. electronic financial transactions, from ATM cards 
 to wire transfers, was broken by a low-powered 90-megahertz Pentium 
 processor.

 In 1977, when this code was first approved by the U.S. government as a 
 standard, it was deemed unbreakable. And for good reason - there are 72 
 quadrillion different combinations in a 56-bit code. However, with today's 
 technology, these 72 quadrillion different combinations can each be tried 
 - it's only a matter of time and determination.

 Two days after this encryption code was broken, however, the Senate Commerce
 Committee voted, in accordance with administration policy, to force American
 software companies to perpetuate this already compromised 56-bit encryption
 system.

 Meanwhile, 128- bit encryption software from European firms is available to 
 every Web user. Interestingly, European firms can import this supersecure 
 encryption technology (originally developed by Americans) to the U.S., but 
 U.S. companies are forbidden by law from exporting these same programs to 
 other countries.

 So to move forward with the president's policy or the Commerce Committee's 
 bill would be an act of folly, creating a cadre of government peeping Toms 
 and causing severe damage to our vibrant software industries. Government 
 would be caught in a perpetual game of catch-up with whiz-kid code-breakers 
 and industry advances.

 Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., has signaled his objection to both 
 proposals. He and I would like to work to bring to the floor a version of 
 the encryption legislation by Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont. Burns' bill closely 
 resembles the popular House encryption bill sponsored by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, 
 R- Va. Both measures would not require sharing of keys with the goverment.

 In essence, these proposals would give U.S. encryption software manufacturers 
 the freedom to compete on equal footing in the worldwide marketplace. They 
 would set up a quasi-governmental board for the industry to decide encryption 
 bit strength based on the current level of international technology.

 U.S. companies are on the front line of online technologies - the value- 
 added industries of the future.

 The best policy for encryption technology is one that can rapidly react to 
 breakthroughs in decoding capability and roll back encryption limits as 
 needed. The Burns and Goodlatte proposals would accomplish this. In contrast, 
 the Clinton administration's unnecessary and invasive interest in international 
 e-mail is a wholly unhealthy precedent, especially given this administration's 
 track record on FBI files and Internal Revenue Service snooping.

 Every medium by which people communicate can be exploited by those with 
 illegal or immoral intentions. Nevertheless, this is no reason to hand Big 
 Brother the keys to unlock our e-mail diaries, open our ATM records or 
 translate our international communications.

 (C) Copyright 1997 Investors Business Daily


