1994-09-01 - Re: Cyberspatial governments?

Header Data

From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
To: adam@bwh.harvard.edu
Message Hash: d43e3cfa0c1f9871a336f63f886f4c9ce5c7eb55284a6d91f6f05577cafbd006
Message ID: <199409010045.RAA07345@servo.qualcomm.com>
Reply To: <199408302123.RAA22479@walker.bwh.harvard.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-09-01 00:45:21 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 17:45:21 PDT

Raw message

From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 17:45:21 PDT
To: adam@bwh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: Cyberspatial governments?
In-Reply-To: <199408302123.RAA22479@walker.bwh.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <199409010045.RAA07345@servo.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>	If you talk about the actions of specific agencies, such as
>the FCC, DEA, NSA, etc, you will see that much of their motivation
>comes from bureaucratic turf wars.  Seeing 'Government' as your great
>enemy is a damaging misnomer.

Indeed, many government policies can be understood only from this
perspective. Clipper is a perfect example. Key escrow exists only
because the NSA doesn't want to risk blame if some terrorist or drug
dealer were to use an unescrowed NSA-produced algorithm.

The fact that a terrorist or drug dealer can easily go elsewhere and
obtain other strong or stronger algorithms without key escrow is
irrelevant. The NSA simply doesn't care as long as *they* can't be
blamed for whatever happens. Classic CYA, nothing more.

A similar analysis applies to the export control regulations regarding
cryptography.

Phil





Thread