From: Peter Wayner <pcw@access.digex.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 85b8d39e871194b538a7564ae895122885d2c0e6d0f5bed821c4052be98e51b1
Message ID: <199304201220.AA27725@access.digex.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-04-20 12:21:01 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 05:21:01 PDT
From: Peter Wayner <pcw@access.digex.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 05:21:01 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Objections...
Message-ID: <199304201220.AA27725@access.digex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
I think one very serious objection to the SkipJack system is
that the secrecy prevents us from coming up with Software implementations
of the system. Naturally, they don't want that to happen because
people start finding easy ways to screw up the encrypted block of
key information needed by the government. But regardless of that,
software implementations of DES have been extremely useful for
everyone. There is probably 10 times as much encryption done using
software DES than hardware. Maybe 1000 times as much.
The fact is that software protection is much easier for the public
to use. They don't need to buy an extra chip for their computer.
They just run some software. It's cheaper. More populist.
I think this is the most practical and non-inflamatory argument
for public access to the algorithm.
-Peter Wayner
Return to April 1993
Return to “Peter Wayner <pcw@access.digex.com>”