From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 94 14:54:13 PST
To: CYPHERPUNKS@toad.com
Subject: POLI: Politics vs Technol
Message-ID: <199401032049.AA12825@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


H>Have people forgotten the Clipper proposal, with the possible 
H>follow-on to make non-Clipper encryption illegal?  To the extent this
H>proposal has been or will be defeated, it will happen through political
H>maneuvering, not technology.

If it got that far, a ban on unapproved crypto would be defeated by 
litigation not politicking.  There is no chance that a crypto ban would be 
upheld by the Supremes these days.  The courts have explicitly ruled that 
one can speak other languages (than English) if one wishes.  Crypto is 
just another language.

H>Have people forgotten the PGP export investigation?  Phil Zimmermann 
H>hasn't.  He and others may be facing the prospect of ten years in prison
H>if they were found guilty of illegal export.  

I'd like to see some indictments first.  The trial would be fun.  Long 
sentences are unlikely in any case.

H>If anyone has any suggestions for how to escape from jail into
H>cyberspace I'd like to hear about them.

The same way one survives and atomic bomb (for those who asked) by *not* 
being there when it goes off.  Those indicted have two years prior to 
trial to leave the country.  Anyone who can't figure out how to flee the 
jurisdiction in two years deserves prison.

H>Mike's SecureDrive is a terrific program for protecting privacy.  But
H>if we want to keep keys secret from politically-motivated
H>investigations, we have to rely on the very political and
H>non-technological Fifth Amendment (an amendment which Mike Godwin of EFF
H>and others contend does not actually protect disclosure of cryptographic
H>keys).  Again, we need to win political, not technological, victories in
H>order to protect our privacy.

Encryption alone will absolutely protect the 99.99% of communications that 
are never the subject of any government disclosure orders.  Investigations 
take *serious* money.  The government can only investigate (let alone 
prosecute) a very small number of individuals.  Since much of their 
attention will necessarily be on others, the members of this list -- much 
less the general public -- have little to worry about.

What's the big deal.  Dan White emptied his revolver into the Mayor of the 
City of San Francisco, reloaded, and then emptied it again into the body 
of a member of the Board of Supervisors.  For this crime, he served 5 
years and 2 months.  Since nothing we are doing is worse, we can't serve 
more than that amount of time.  (I know, I know.  Just kidding.)

The criminal justice system is a pretty dull tool, however.  The Feds have 
lost most of the big political cases that went to trial over the last few 
years.  They lost all but one of the insider trading cases.  They lost the 
BCCI case.  They lost the Ollie North prosecution.  They lost the Steve 
Jackson games case.

In confrontations with the Feds, behave like the guy who was acquitted of 
insider trading in the Princeton Partners case -- wear a Cat hat reading 
"Shit Happens" to all the negotiating sessions.

Remember too that in the absence of war, 99.99% of the damage "the 
government" does to you is actually self inflicted.  Don't obey.  Don't 
line up.  Don't fill out the proper forms, properly.  Don't give them your 
right name and address.  Keep fixed in your mind the words of the first 
rebel, a fallen angel, who said, "Non Servatum" (I will not serve).

DCF

Who will request that the jury at *his* trial be required to watch 
Schindler's List.  






--- WinQwk 2.0b#1165