From: ssimpson@eff.org (Sarah L Simpson)
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 93 12:51:16 PDT
To: com-priv@lists.psi.com
Subject: ACTIVIST ALERT -The Clock is Ticking!
Message-ID: <199309271949.AA04775@eff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



That's right - the clock is ticking.  The deadline to get things to
cryptnow@eff.org is 8:00pm EST.  It is now just before 4pm - that's 4 short
hours to go.  Don't let this deadline pass!  Please note - my previous
message offered a sample letter directed to "Mr. Director".  NIST's
director is actually a woman, so please omit the "Mr.".


=============================
And because time is so tight, EFF has set up an Internet address where you
can send your electronic comments in lieu of mailing them through the U.S.
Postal Service.  Send your letters to:

        cryptnow@eff.org

We will be printing out all letters and hand-delivering them before the
deadline, so please make sure to send us any letter you want included no
later than 8pm on Monday, September 27.

If you would like additional background materials, you can browse the
pub/EFF/crypto area of our anonymous ftp site (ftp.eff.org).  The original
solicitation of comments can be found there and is called
NIST-escrow-proposal.

DO NOT WAIT TO WRITE YOUR COMMENTS!  TIME IS SHORT!


======================
<<your name>>
<<your organization>>
<<your street address>>
<<your city, state, zip>>

<<date>>


National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST)
ATTN:  Proposed FIPS for Escrowed Encryption Standard
Technology Building, Room B-154
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD  20899

Mr. Director:

I am writing to oppose the Proposed Federal Information Processing Standard
(FIPS) for and Escrowed Encryption Standard, docket # 930659-3159.

Encryption is vital for the protection of individual privacy in the
Information Age.  As more and more personal information flows around
electronic networks, we all need strong encryption to safeguard information
from unwanted intrusion

NIST should not be moving forward with technical standards specification
until critical policy decisions are made.  These policy issues include:

o       Continued Legal Use of All Forms of Encryption:  When the Clinton
Administration announced the Clipper Chip, it assured the public that this
would be a purely voluntary system.  We must have legal guarantees that
Clipper isn't the first step toward prohibition against un-escrowed
encryption.

o       Legal Rights of Escrow Users:  If people choose to deposit their
keys with the government or any other escrow agent, they must have some
legal recourse in the event that those keys are improperly released.  The
most recent draft of the escrow procedures specifically states, however:

        "These procedures do not create, and are not intended to create,
any substantive rights for individuals intercepted through electronic
surveillance, and noncompliance with these procedures shall not provide the
basis for any motion to suppress or other objection to the introduction of
electronic surveillance evidence lawfully acquired."

        Leaving users with no recourse will discourage use of the system
and is a tacit acceptance of unscrupulous government behavior.

o       Open Standards:  People won't use encryption unless they trust it. 
Secret standards such as Clipper cannot be evaluated by independent experts
and do not deserve the public trust.

        In addition, the current proposed technical standard is incomplete.
 It should not be approved until futher comment on the complete proposal is
possible

o       Operating Procedures Unclear:  The full operating procedures for
the escrow agents has yet to be issued.  Public comment must be sought on
the complete procedures, not just the outline presented in the draft FIPS. 
Even the government-selected algorithm review group has declared that it
needs more information on the escrow process.

o       Identity of Escrow Agents:  The identity of one or both of the
escrow agents has not been firmly established.

o       Algorithm Classified:  Asking for comments on an algorithm that is
classified makes a mockery of citizen participation in government
decision-making.

NIST will be involved in making many critical decisions regarding the
National Information Infrastructure.  The next time NIST solicits public
comments, it should be ready to accept reply by electronic mail in addition
to paper-based media.

Sincerely,

<<name>>
<<title>>
******************************
Sarah L. Simpson
Membership Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
1001 G Street, NW
Suite 950 East
Washington, DC  20001
202/347-5400 tel
202/393-5509 fax