From: uni@acs.bu.edu (Shaen Bernhardt)
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 93 10:43:58 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Media Blitz
Message-ID: <9304181743.AA38488@acs.bu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Having sent faxes to all the targets on my media list, I'm looking for the
following:
 
1>  A Fax number for AT&T public relations so I can explain to them that they
can count my business out if they don't wise up.
 
2>  A Fax number for Intergraph Corp
 
3>  Internet addresses for same.
 
I sent the following text to several media contacts:


April 18, 1993
 
Sir or Madam,
 
 
I am sending this text to call your attention to what I and others 
believe to be a grievous attack on privacy for the private sector and 
the public at  large.
 
On April 16, 1993 the White House Office of the Press Secretary 
issued a statement regarding the administration's emerging policy on 
encryption hardware and technology.  In short this policy is a ruse.
 
With the increasing reliance on data links and E-Mail to 
communicate, cryptography has evolved to protect the otherwise 
vulnerable data traffic in this country.  E-Mail and data transfers are 
not as secure from tampering and compromise as is the postal 
service.  Messages sent through mail nets have no "envelopes" and 
are unprotected from the prying eyes of system administrators on 
any of the many nodes a message may pass through.  Indeed those 
using electronic mediums for mail services are entitled to some 
reasonable assurance of privacy.  As a result, cryptography and 
encryption have become fruitful industries in this country.
 
The Clinton administration seems well on the way to destroying this 
industry and stomping on the rights of citizens to secure their 
communications from surveillance.
 
The "Clipper Chip Proposal," which is becoming known in the 
academic community as the "Big Brother Proposal," bills itself as a 
solution to the conflict between law enforcement and "crypto 
industry."  It is not.  By enforcing the Clipper technology as a 
standard, the Clinton administration has taken the first step in 
regulating all encryption technology and selling short the American 
people.
 
The Clipper technology, by the administration's own admission, is 
compromised from the beginning.  Cipher keys for Clipper 
hardware are to be segmented and stored in depositories maintained 
by two agencies, (which remain yet unnamed) and released with "the 
proper authorization."  No one educated in the nuances of 
encryption would take such a system seriously.  Willingness to 
accept a system that comes already compromised is simply 
unimaginable, at least while other systems are still around.
 
The administration insists that the algorithm for the Clipper 
technology is secret, and will not be released to the academic sector 
or the public at large.  A vital part of the development process of 
any new algorithm is its' ability to withstand the scrutiny of the 
academic and private sectors.  The current encryption standard 
(DES) is a prime example.  The algorithm for DES was made 
available to the academic and private sectors at no loss of security to 
those using DES based systems.  Indeed the weaknesses of DES 
were eventually revealed by the academic sector as a direct result of 
this scrutiny.  Part of the mark of a well designed system is in the 
ability to remain secure despite disclosure of the algorithm.  No 
entity can be expected to trust such a system without being able to 
review it for additional "backdoors" written into the system.
 
I cannot fathom that the administration has not realized these 
points.  They must know that such a system as the Clipper Chip is 
unmarketable and doomed to failure in its' current state.  As long as 
other technology remains available, who would buy the Clipper 
Chip?  And how does the introduction of the Clipper Chip aid law 
enforcement in protecting American citizens?  Alone it does not.  
Any organization, criminal or otherwise, would be quite content to 
patronize other vendors not employing the Clipper Chip, many of 
which currently exist.
 
I can only assume then that the administration's next step is to place 
heavy regulations on other hardware and software products not 
utilizing Clipper Chip technology, using the availability of Clipper 
systems to justify their move.
 
The increasingly authoritarian methods the administration continues 
to adopt deserve careful scrutiny.  The precedents established by 
this move, namely the regulation of the software industry, denial of 
reasonable freedom from government intrusion in personal affairs, 
and government created technology monopolies, are more than 
alarming, but dangerous.
 
When confronted with the possibility of facing fines or criminal 
penalties for which computer program we use, the phrase I hear 
more and more often is, "I can't believe it's happening here."
 
 
						Most Concerned,
 
						[Signature]
						Shaen Logan Bernhardt I
						(uni@acs.bu.edu)


Are my letters annyoing anyone yet?

uni (Dark)