From: Michael Sattler <msattler@jungle.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 11:02:57 PST
To: perry@imsi.com
Subject: Re: AT&T and VLSI Encryption device
Message-ID: <v03001108ab5431879c3e@[140.174.229.228]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 09:55 1/31/95, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>Michael Sattler says:
>>
>> How does this device conform with the legislated requirement that it must
>> deliver plaintext to the government upon court-approved demand?
>
>There is no such requirement.

I was under the impression that "the Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act requires equipment manufacturers and telecommunications
carriers to develop network technologies that are readily wiretapped" (from
Garfinkel's book).  Doesn't a "hardware encryption device for use in lots
of communications devices, including cell phones, PDAs, etc." seem to fall
into that category?

If it doesn't then I have no idea what CALEA is supposed to do.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Michael Sattler <msattler@jungle.com>       San Francisco, California  |
Digital Jungle Consulting Services     http://www.jungle.com/msattler/ |
                                                                       |
And so these men of Indostan/ disputed long and loud/ each in his own  |
opinion/ exceeding stiff and strong/ though each was partly right/ and |
all were in the wrong! - John Godfrey Saxe                             |