From: eichin@cygnus.com (Mark Eichin)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 07:06:19 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: re: Weak stenography.
In-Reply-To: <9306230844.AA27879@netcom3.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <9306231406.AA29189@cygnus.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>> 1. Make programs like "readdat.exe" ubiquitous...distribute them on
	Well, you need a program to read your DATs and play them
anyhow. What's a few extra options? Presumably it would handle various
filtering and sampling anyhow; perhaps the common DAT tools or audio
tools could just happen to contain a bit slicer... 
	Still doesn't sound like it's useful for anything you need to
access alot or use in the short term. Best to keep fighting for real
privacy...

>> I must admit I'm disappointed to hear Hellman say something like this.
>> Every time somebody comes up with a "new" or "improved" key escrow scheme,
>> they give implicit approval to the whole basic idea of key escrow. Which
>> is fundamentally unacceptable in *any* form.
	It could be said that this focusses the argument on the real
issue... which is *not* the technology, but the trust of government
(or the need for it.) 
	Perhaps this analogy isn't too stretched: suppose your child
wants to keep a private diary. They can keep it under two locks -- but
only if mother has one key and father has the other (so that if they
agree that they need to see the diary, they can.) Does this seem fair
itself? [too many would argue yes... that as the parents are
responsible for the child, it is reasonable to do this] Does this seem
like a good analogy? [perhaps closer than some would like to admit...
"but mother and father are closer than any escrow agencies would
be..." "oh really?" etc.]
							_Mark_