From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 94 12:20:41 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (cypherpunks)
Subject: Re: doj_escrow_intercept.procedures (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <9402051926.AA10212@vail.tivoli.com>
Message-ID: <199402052018.MAA14027@mail.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Mike McNally sez:
> 
> 
> Robert Cain writes:
>  > Wow! That procedure...
> 
> I'm having great difficulty extracting meaning from your prose, but I

Hmmm, others have been having that problem lately.  :-)

> think you're saying that you like that the government has escrowed
> keys to Clipper phones for use in "national emergencies".

Yes, after long consideration that, that as I said runs counter to my
self interest, I had to come to the conclusion first that is was in
fact desirable to have a means to tap.  It should be very difficult
though and verifiable.

> 
>  > Imagine that it is your city that gets a terrorist nuke built
>  > in one of its basements.
> 
> We don't have many basements in Austin.

:-)

> 
>  > Truly secure and easy communication makes
>  > that a whole lot easier 
> 
> Makes *what* a whole lot easier, building the bomb or catching the
> bombers?

It makes it easier for any clandestine plan to be established and
carried out.  This is the greatest fear they have.  Arbitrary networks
of people with arbitrary purposes can be securely formed world wide
within the limits of the trust inherent in the people.  Can you spell
r e v o l u t i o n?  It's not me that's paranoid, it's them.  :-)

> 
>  > but then since a truly secure box is real
>  > simple to make, 
> 
> Really?

Yep.  It would take me about three months of full time effort and
would be almost a single chip.  I am not the only one by any means.

> 
>  > it sort of obviates the reasoning for trying to do the
>  > standardization anyway.
> 
> Obviates the reasoning?  I'm confused.

Well, if it is as easy as I contend to make devices that are truly
secure all the people that they would want to be able to monitor
would undoubtedly have one.

> 
>  > Anybody who really wants absolute security
>  > will be able to get it at some price that won't be too high.  :-)
> 
> So what exactly are you talking about?  Sounds like you're happy the
> government introduced Clipper because it's so easy for anyone to build
> secure cryptographic devices.  I'm having trouble understanding this.

No, I think now that Clipper is ultimately stupid.  I do think that if
it were *not* possible to easily get around it (black market probably,
remember the "blue boxes" of yore :-) and not possible probably to even
detect the illegal device's use (just use it as a front end to a
Clipper :-), then an escrow system which was benign (I realize some
think that an oxymoron) would be a good idea.

> 
>  > I would like to propose us the challenge to come up with a way
>  > utilizing this crypto technology and signatures and such to guarantee a
>  > verifiable trail whenever it is done that is available to any court
>  > of law.
> 
> Whenever *what* is done?  Whenever somebody builds a nuclear bomb?

Whenever they use whatever process they may set up to allow back
door entry.  I'm wondering if something analogous to a paper
trail could be guaranteed using our technology.  I don't know
if that is possible but have an inkling that it is.

> 
>  > The implication is clear ... I suggest that, as Tom Lehrer talks about
>  > on his album Revisited, we "Be Prepared."  :-)
> 
> I think we should start with, "Be Lucid."

Or learn to write better.  I'm workin' on it.  :-)

Peace,

Bob

-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-354-8021


           "I used to be different.  But now I'm the same."


--------------PGP 1.0 or 2.0 public key available on request.------------------